Book >/ l7i- 

IBS I 



S'03 



FEONTISPIEOE. 




RUFF and HONOURS (from the Compleat Gamester 1G80). 



" Lastlj, observe the Women with what grace 
They sit, and look their Partners in the face, 
Who from their eyes shoot Cupids fiery darts ; 
Thus make them lose at once their Game and Hearts." 




THE ^ ^ 

LAWS AND PRlNCIPlt^ 




f 



WHIST 

STATED AND EXPLAINED 

AlfD ITS 

PRACTICE ILLUSTRATED 
ON AN ORIGINAL SYSTEM 

^ BY MEANS OF HANDS PLAYED COMPLETELY THKOUGH 



CAVENDISH." 



FROM THE TWELFTH ENGLISH EDITION/ 

BEVISED AND GREATLY ENLARGED. 



JOHN wu6t££e lovell, 

24 Bond Street. 
1881. 



MAY 17 ms 



DEDICATION TO THE NINTH EDITION. 



TO 

JAMES CLAY, Esq., M.P. 

(Chalnnan of the WMst Laws Committee of the Arlington Club, 1864,) 

IS 

CORDIALLY DEDICATED 

BY 

HIS SINCEI^E FRIEND, 

THE AUTHOR. 



DEDICATION TO THE TENTH EDITION. 



OP 



JAMES CLAY 




It has often occurrM^to^the Author that there are 
two principal defects in the existing treatises on the 
game of Whist — the one that the principles of play 
are, in general, laid down as so many isolated 
and arbitrary conventions, the reasons upon which 
such principles are based being seldom, if at all, 
and scarcely ever fully, stated ; the other, that suit- 
able illustrations, by which alone the principles can 
be brought forcibly home and fixed in the memory, 
are almost entirely wanting. The present work is 
an attempt to supply these deficiencies. With regard 
to the latter, the Author feels that nothing, in point 
of illustration of principles, can be so instructive 
as a selection of hands played completely through) 
and accompanied by copious explanations. The 
idea, it is believed, as applied to Whist, is a new 
one, though a similar plan has long been in use in 
treatises on Chess. 

It has not been deemed necessary to occupy space 
by detailing the mode of playing and of scoring, as 
this information can be readily acquired at the table. 
The reader is, therefore, credited with this elemen- 
tary knowledge, and is conducted at once to the 
General Principles, which he is advised to consider 
carefully before proceeding to the Hands. 

CO 



PREFACE TO THE EIGHTH EDITION. 



Since the publication of the previous edition, the 
Laws of Whist have been revised by the Arlington 
and Portland Clubs, and the revised laws have been 
generally adopted. The Author acknowledges with 
thanks the permission granted him to print the 
Club Code verbatim. 

Some cases and decisions are added. These be- 
ing ai^proved by " J. C." are submitted with confi- 
dence to the reader. 

The whole of the Part included under the head 
of " General Principles " has been carefully revised. 

The hands have been recast, and diagram cards 
substituted for the symbols formerly used. 

PORTIiAND CliUB. 
January f 1868. 



(8) 



PREFACE TO THE TENTH EDITION. 



The stereotype plates of the ninth edition being 
worn out, the Author has once more submitted his 
work to careful revision. He has also made the 
following additions : — 1. A Historical sketch of the 
Game of Whist. 2. A fuller statement of the prin- 
ciples which should guide the discard. 3. Some 
illustrations of the best known coups, 4. A number 
of fresh Hands (the Hands also have been re- 
arranged). 5. An Appendix on a new method, 
suggested by the Author, of leading from suits of 
more than four cards. And 6. An Appendix on 
the Management of Trumps when led or called for 
by the partner. 

PORTLAiq^D CliUB, 
June 1, 1874. 



(9) 




PAGE. 

The Laws of Whist 13 

Etiquette of Whist 31 

Cases and Decisions ...... 34 

Historical 43 



PART I. 

GENERAL PRINCIPLES. 

THE FIRST HAND OR LEAD. 



OpvIOInal Leads 66 

Leads fkom Stkoxg Suits 66 

FROM Sequences . . . . . .71 

Analysis of, in Detail . . . .73 

FROM Weak Suits 77 

AT Advanced Periods 80 

Returned Leads .84 

THE SECOKD HAISTD. 
Play of the Second Hand 88 



WITH Strong Suits . 88 

WITH Sequences . . 89 

Analysis of, in Detail 90 

(ii) 



12 



CONTEXTS. 



• THE THIRD HAXD. page. 

Play of the Third Hand tvhex the Lead is from 

Strong Suits 04 

Play of the Third Haxd whex the Lead is from 

Weak Suits ... 94 

FiXESSixG 94 

THE FOURTH HAND. 

Play of the Fourth Haxd 98 



The Command of SnTS 98 

UXDERPLAY 100 

DiSCARDIXG 103 



The Coxyersatiox of the Game .... 105 
TRUMPS. 

The Maxagemext of Tiiumps 110 

Leadixg Trumps 112 

AsKixG FOR Trumps 116 

Trumpixg . . . lis 

FORCIXG 120 

Playixg to the Score 122 

Drawixg In'ferexces 122 

Coups . .128 



PART 11. 

Haxds 144 

Appexdix a 267 

B 277 





ttff'LAWS OF WHIST. 



BY PERMISSION, VERBATIM FROM THE CLUB 
CODE. 



1. The rubber is the best of three games. If the 
first two games be won by the same players, the third 
game is not played. 

•scoring. 

3. A game consists of five points. Each trick, 
above six, counts one point. 

3. Honors, i.e., Ace, King, Queen, and Knave of 
trumps, are thus reckoned : 

If a player and his partner, either separately or 
conjointly, hold — 

I. The four honors, they score four points, 
n. Any three honors, they score two points, 
m. Only two honors, they do not score. 

4. Those players, who, at the commencement of a 
deal, are at the score of four, cannot score honors. 



THE FOOT NOTES ARE ADDED BY THE AUTHOR, 



THE RUBBER. 



14 



THE liAWS OF WHIST. 



5. The penalty for a revoke* takes precedence 
of all other scores. Tricks score next. Honors 
last. 

6. Honors, unless claimed before the trump card 
of the following deal is turned up, cannot be scored. 

7. To score honors is not sufficient ; they must 
be called at the end of the hand ; if so called, they 
may be scored at any time during the game. 

8. The winners gain — 

I. A treble, or game of three points, when their ad- 
versaries have not scored. 
II. A double, or game of two points, when their ad- 
versaries have scored less than three, 
in. A single, or game of one point, when their ad 
versaries have scored three, or four. 

9. The winners of the rubber gain two points (com- 
monly called the rubber points), in addition to the 
value of their games. 

10. Should the rubber have consisted of three 
games, the value of the losers' game is deducted from 
the gross number of points gained by their oppo- 
nents. 

11. If an erroneous score be proved, such mistake 
can be corrected prior to the conclusion of the game 
in which it occurred, and such game is not concluded 
until the trump card of the following deal has been 
turned up. 

12. If an erroneous score, affecting the amount of 
the rubber, t be proved, such mistake can be rectified 
at any time during the rubber. 

* Vide Law 72. 

t e.g. If a single is scored by mistake for a double or treble, or 
vice versd. 



THE LAWS OP WHIST. 



15 



CUTTING. 

13. The ace is the lowest card. 

14. In all cases, every one must cut from the same 
pack. 

15. Should a player expose more than one card, he 
must cut again. 

FORMATION OF TABLE. 

16. If there are more than four candidates, the 
players are selected by cutting : those first in the 
room having the preference. The four who cut the 
lowest cards play first, and again cut to decide on 
partners ; the two lowest play against the two high- 
est ; the lowest is the dealer, who has choice of cards 
and seats, and, having once made his selection, must 
abide by it. 

17. When there are more than six candidates, 
those who cut the two next lowest cards belong to 
the table, which is complete with six players ; on the 
retirement of one of those six players, the candidate 
who cut the next lowest card has a prior right to 
any aftercomer to enter the table. 

CUTTING CARDS OF EQUAL VALUE. 

18. Two players cutting cards of equal value,* un- 
less such cards are the two highest, cut again; 

* In cutting for partners. 



16 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



should they be the two lowest, a fresh cut is neces- 
sary to decide which of those two deals.* 

19. Three players cutting cards of equal value cut 
again ; should the fourth (or remaining) card be the 
highest, the two lowest of the new cut are partners, 
the lower of those two the dealer ; should the fourth 
card be the lowest, the two highest are partners, the 
original lowest the dealer, t 



CUTTING OUT. 

20. At the end of a rubber, should admission be 
claimed by any one, or by two candidates, he who 
has, or they who have, played a greater number of 
consecutive rubbers than the others is, or are, out ; 
but when all have played the same number, they 
must cut to decide upon the out-goers ; the highest 
are out. 

* Example' A three, two sixes, and a knaye are cut. The two 
sixes cut again, and the lowest plays with the three. Suppose at the 
second cut, the two sixes cut a king and a queen, the queen plays 
with the three. 

If at the second cut a lower card than the three is cut, the three 
still retains its privileges as original low, and has the deal and choice 
of cards and seats. 

t .Example. Three aces and a two are cut. The three aces cut 
again. The two is the original high, and plays with the highest of 
the next cut. 

Suppose at the second cut, two more twos and a king are drawn. 
The king plays with the original two, and the other pair of twos cut 
again for deal. 

Suppose instead, the second cut to consist of an ace and two 
knaves. The two knaves cut again, and the highest plays with the 
two. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



17 



ENTRY AND RE-ENTRT. 

21. A candidate wishing to enter a table must de- 
clare such intention prior to any of the players hav- 
ing cut a card, either for the purpose of commencing 
a fresh rubber, or of cutting out. 

22. In the formation of fresh tables, those candi- 
dates who have neither belonged to nor played at 
any other table have the prior right of entry ; the 
others decide their right of admission by cutting. 

23. Any one quitting a table prior to the conclusion 
of a rubber, may, with consent of the other three 
players, appoint a substitute in his absence during 
that rubber. 

24. A player cutting into one table, whilst belong- 
ing to another, loses his right * of re-entry into that 
latter, and takes his chance of cutting in, as if he 
were a fresh candidate.! 

25. If any one break up a table, the remaining 
players have the prior right to him of entry into any 
other, and should there not be sufficient vacancies 
at such other table to admit all those candidates, 
they settle their precedence by cutting. 

SHUFFLING. 

26. The pack must neither be shuffled below the 
table nor so that the face of any card be seen. 

27. The pack must not be shuffled during the play 
of the hand. 

* i.e. his prior right 

t And last in the room (vide Law 16). 

2 



18 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



28. A pack, having been played with, must neither 
be shuffled, by dealing it into packets, nor across the 
table. 

29. Each playei^ has a right to shuffle, once only, 
except as provided by Rule 32, prior to a deal, after 
a false cut,* or when a new deal f has occurred. 

30. The dealer's partner must collect the cards 
for the ensuing deal, and has the first right to shuffle 
that pack. 

31. Each player, after shuffling, must place the 
cards, properly collected and face downwards, to the 
left of the player about to deal. 

32. The dealer has always the right to shuffle last ; 
but should a card or cards be seen during his shuf- 
fling or whilst giving the pack to be cut, he may be 
compelled to re-shuffle. 

THIS DUAL. 

33. Each player deals in his turn ; the right of 
dealing goes to the left. 

34. The player on the dealer's right cuts the pack, 
and in dividing it, must not leave fewer than four 
cards in either packet ; if in cutting, or in replacing 
one of the two packets on the other, a card be ex- 
posed, t or if there be any confusion of the cards, or a 
doubt as to the exact place in which the pack was 
divided, there must be a fresh cut. 

35. When a player, whose duty it is to cut, has 



* Vide Law 34. t Vide Law 37. 

t After the two packets have been re-united, Law 38 comes into 
operation. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



19 



once separated the pack, he cannot alter his inten- 
tion ; he can neither re-shuffle nor re-cut the cards. 

36. When the pack is cut, should the dealer shuffle 
the cards, he loses his deal. 

A NEW DEAL. 

37. There must be a new deal* — 

I. If, during a deal, or during the play of a hand, the 

pack be proved incorrect or imperfect. 
11. If any card, excepting the last, be faced in the 
pack. 

38. If, whilst dealing, a card be exposed by the 
dealer or his partner, should neither of the adver- 
saries have touched the cards, the latter can claim a 
new deal ; a card exposed by either adversary gives 
that claim to the dealer, provided that his partner 
has not touched a card ; if a new deal does not take 
place, the exposed card cannot be called. 

39. If, during dealing, a player touch any of his 
cards, the adversaries may do the same, without los- 
ing their privilege of claiming a new deal, should 
chance give them such option. 

40. If, in dealing, one of the last cards be exposed, 
and the dealer turn up the 'trump before there is rea- 
sonable time for his adversaries to decide as to a fresh 
deal, they do not thereby lose their privilege. 

41 . If a player, whilst dealing, look at the trump 
card, his adversaries have a right to see it, and may 
exact a new deal. 

42. If a player take into the hand dealt to him a 
card belonging to the other pack, the adversaries, on 

* i. e., the same dealer must deal again. Vide also Laws 47 and 50. 



20 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



discovery of the error, may decide whether they will 
have a fresh deal or not. 

A MISDEAIi. 

43. A misdeal loses the deal.* 

44. It is a misdeal f — 

I. Unless the cards are dealt into four packets, one 

at a time in regular rotation, beginning with the 
player to the dealer's left. 

II. Should the dealer place the last (i. c, the trump) 

card, face downwards, on his own, or any other 
pack. 

III. Shonld the trump card not come in its regular 

order to the dealer ; but he does not lose his 
deal if the pack be proved imperfect 

IV. Should a player have fourteen | cards, and either 

of the other three less than thirteen. § 
V. Should the dealer, under an impression that he 
has made a mistake, either count the cards on 
the table, or the remainder of the pack. 

VI. Should the dealer deal two cards at once, or two 
cards to the same hand, and then deal a third ; 
but if, prior to dealing that third card, the 
dealer can, by altering the position of one card 
only, rectify such error, he may do so, except 
as provided by the second paragraph of this 
Law. 

VII. Should the dealer omit to have the pack cut to 
him, and the adversaries discover the error, 
prior to the trump card being turned up, and 
before looking at their cards, but not after hav- 
ing done so. 

* Except as provided in Laws 45 and 50. t Vide also Law 36. 
t Or more. § The pack being perfect. Vide Law 47. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



21 



45. A misdeal does not lose the deal if, during the 
dealing, either of the adversaries touch the cards 
prior to the dealer's partner having done so, but 
should the latter have first interfered with the cards, 
notwithstanding either or both of the adversaries 
have subsequently done the same, the deal is lost. 

46. Should three players have their right number 
of cards — the fourth have less than thirteen, and not 
discover such deficiency until he has played any of 
his cards,* the deal stands good ; should he have 
played, he is as answerable for any revoke he may 
have made as if the missing card, or cards, had been 
in his hand ; f he may search the other pack for it, 
or them, 

47. If a pack, during or after a rubber, be proved 
incorrect or imperfect, such proof does not alter any 
past score, game, or rubber ; that hand in which the 
imperfection was detected is null and void ; the 
dealer deals again. 

48. Any one dealing out of turn, or with the ad- 
versary's cards, may be stopped before the trump 
card is turned up, after which the game must pro- 
ceed as if no mistake had been made. 

49. A player can neither shuffle, cut, nor deal for 
his partner, without the permission of his opponents. 

50. If the adversaries interrupt a dealer whilst 
dealing, either by questioning the score or asserting 
that it is not his deal, and fail to establish such claim, 
should a misdeal occur, he may deal again. 

51. Should a player take his partner's deal, and 

* i. e., until after he has played to the first trick. . 
t Vide also Law 70, and Law 44, paragraph iv. ■ 



22 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



misdeal, the latter is liable to the usual penalty, 
and the adversary next in rotation to the player who 
ought to have dealt then deals. 

THE TRUMP CARD. 

52. The dealer, when it is his turn to play to the 
first trick, should take the trump card into his hand ; 
if left on the table after the first trick be turned and 
quitted, it is liable to be called ; * his partner may 
at any time remind him of the liability. 

53. After the dealer has taken the trump card into 
his hand, it cannot be asked for ; f a, player naming 
it at any time during the play of that hand is liable 
to have his highest or lowest trump called, f 

54. If the dealer take the trump card into his hand 
before it is his turn to play, he may be desired to lay 
it on the table ; should he show a wrong card, this 
card may be called, as also a second, a third, &c., 
until the trump card can be produced. 

55. If the dealer declare himself unable to recollect 
the trump card, his highest or lowest trump may be 

' called at any time during that hand, and, unless it 
cause him to revoke, must be played ; the call may 
be repeated, but not changed, i.e., from highest to 
lowest, or vice versa, until such card is played. 

* It is not usual to call the trump card if left y\\ the table, 
t Any one may inquire what the trump suit is, at any time. 
t In the manner described in Law. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



23 



CARDS LIABLE TO BE CALLED. 

56. All exposed cards are liable to be called, and 
must be left * on the table ; but a card is not an ex- 
posed card when dropped on the floor, or elsewhere 
below the table. 

The following are exposed f cards : — 

I. Two or more cards played at once, J 
n. Any card dropped with its face upwards, or in any 
way exposed on or above the table, even though 
snatched up so quickly that no one can name it. 

57. If any one play to an imperfect trick the best 
card on the table, § or lead one which is a winning 
card as against his adversaries, and then lead again, || 
or play several such winning cards, one after the 
other, without waiting for his partner to play, the 
latter may be called on to win, if he can, the first or 
any other of those tricks, and the other cards thus 
improperly played are exposed cards. 

58. If a player, or players, under the impression 
that the game is lost — or won — or for other reasons — 
throw his or their cards on the table face upwards, 
such cards are exposed, and liable to be called, each 
player's by the adversary ; but should one player 
a J one retain his hand, he cannot be forced to aban- 
don it. 

^ Face upwards. 

t Detached cards (i.e., cards taken out of the hand but not dropped) 
are not liable to be called unless named; vide Law 60. It is impor- 
tant to distinguish between exposed and detached cards. 

* If two or more cards are played at once, the adversaries have a 
right to call which they please to the trick in course of play, and af- 
terwards to call the others. 

§ And then lead without waiting for his partner to play. 

y Without waiting for his partner to play. 



24 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



59. If all four players throw their cards on the 
table face upwards, the hands are abandoned ; and 
no one can again take up his cards. Should this 
general exhibition show that the game might have 
been saved or won, neither claim can be entertained, 
unless a revoke be established. The revoking play era 
are then liable to the following penalties : they can- 
not under any circumstances win the game by the re- 
sult of that hand, and the adversaries may add three 
to their score, or deduct three from that of the revok- 
ing players. 

60. A card detached from the rest of the hand so 
as to be named is liable to be called ; but should the 
adversary name a wrong card, he is liable to have a 
suit called when he or his partner have the lead.* 

61. If a player, who has rendered himself liable to 
have the highest or lowest of a suit called, fail to 
play as desired, or if when called on to lead one suit, 
lead another, having in his hand one or more cards 
of that suit demanded, he incurs the penalty of a re- 
voke. 

63. If any player lead out of turn, his adversaries 
may either call the card erroneously led — or may call 
a suit from him or his partner when it is next the 
turn of either of them f to lead. 

63. If any player lead out of turn, and the other 

* i.e., the first time that side obtains the lead. 

t i.e., the penalty of calling a suit must be exacted from whichever 
of them next first obtains the lead. It follows that if the player who 
leads out of turn is the partner of the person who ought to have led, 
and a suit is called, it must be called at once from the right leader. 
If he is allowed to play as he pleases, the only penalty that remains is 
to call the card erroneously led. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



25 



three have followed him, the trick is complete, and 
the error cannot be rectified; but if only the second, 
or the second and third, have played to the false 
lead, their cards, on discovery of the mistake, are 
taken back ; there is no penalty against any one, ex- 
cepting the original offender, whose card may be 
called — or he, or his partner, when either of them* 
has next the lead, may be compelled to play any suit 
demanded by the adversaries. 

64. In no case can a player be compelled to play a 
card which would oblige him to revoke. 

65. The call of a card may be repeated f until such 
card has been played. 

66. If a player called on to lead a suit have none of 
it, the penalty is paid. 



CARDS PLAYED IN ERROR, OR NOT PiATBD 
TO A TRICK. 

67. If the third hand play before the second, the 
fourth hand may play before his partner. 

68. Should the third hand not have played, and 
the fourth play before his partner, the latter may be 
called on to win, or not to win the trick. 

69. If any one omit playing to a former trick, and 
such error be not discovered until he has played to 
the next, the adversaries may claim a new deal ; 
should they decide that the deal stand good, the sur- 
plus card at the end of the hand is considered to have 

♦ i.tf,, wMchever of them next first has the lead, 
t At every trick. 



26 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



been played to the imperfect trick, but doei? not con- 
stitute a revoke therein. 

70. If any one play two cards to the same trick, 
or mix his trump, or other card, with a trick to which 
it does not properly belong, and the mistake be not 
discovered until the hand is played out, he is answer- 
able for all consequent revokes he may have made.* 
If, during the play of the hand, the error be detected, 
the tricks may be counted face downwards, in order 
to ascertain whether there be among them a card 
too many : should this be the case, they may be 
searched, and the card restored ; the player is, how- 
ever, liable for all revokes which he may have mean- 
while made. 



THE REVOKE. 

71. Is when a player, holding one or more cards of 
the suit led, plays a card of a different suit.f 

72. The penalty for a revoke : — 

I. Is at the option of the adversaries, who, at the end 
of the hand, may either take three tricks from 
♦ the revoking player J — or deduct three points 
from his score — or add three to their own score ; 

II. Can be claimed for as many revokes as occur dur- 

ing the hand ; 

III. Is applicable only to the score of the game in 

which it occurs ; 

IV. Cannot be divided, i.e., a player cannot add one 

or two to his own score and deduct one or two 
from the revoking player ; 

* Vide also Law 46. t Vide also Law 61. 

t And add them to their own. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



27 



Y. Takes precedence of every other score, e.g., — The 
claimants two — their opponents nothing — the 
former add three to their score — and thereby win 
a treble game, even should the latter have made 
thirteen tricks, and held four honors. 

73. A revoke is established, if the trick in which it 
occur be turned and quitted, i.e., the hand removed 
from that trick after it has been turned face down- 
wards on the table — or if either the revoking player 
or his partner, whether in his right turn or other- 
wise, lead or play to the following trick. 

74. A player may ask his partner whether he has 
not a card of the suit which he has renounced ; 
should the question be asked before the trick is turned 
and quitted, 'subsequent turning and quitting does 
not establish the revoke, and the error may be cor- 
rected, unless the question be answered in the nega- 
tive, or unless the revoking player or his partner 
have led or played to the following trick. 

75. At the end of the hand, the claimants of a re- 
voke may search all the tricks.* 

76. If a player discover his mistake in time to save 
a revoke, the adversaries, Avhenever they think fit, 
may call the card thus played in error, or may re- 
quire him to play his highest or lowest card to that 
trick in which he has renounced ; — any player or 
players who have played after him may withdraw 
their cards and substitute others : the cards with- 
drawn are not liable to be called. 

77. If a revoke be claimed, and the accused player 
or his partner mix the cards before they have been 
sufficiently examined by the adversaries, the revoke 

* Vide Law 77. 



28 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



is established. The mixing of the cards only renders 
the proof of a revoke difficult, but does not prevent 
the claim, and possible estabhshment, of the penalty. 

78. A revoke cannot be claimed after the cards 
have been cut for the following deal. 

79. The revoking player and, his partner may, 
under all circumstances, require the hand in which 
the revoke has been detected to be played out. 

80. If a revoke occur, be claimed and proved, bets 
on the odd trick, or on amount of score, must be 
decided by the actual state of the latter, after the 
penalty is paid. 

81. Should the players on both sides subject them- 
selves to the penalty of one or more revokes, neither 
can win the game ; each is punished at the discretion 
of his adversary.* 

82. In whatever way the penalty be enforced, 
under no circumstances can a player win the game 
by the result of the hand during which he has re- 
voked ; he cannot score more than four. ( Vide 
Rule 61.) 

CALLING FOR NEW CARDS. 

83. Any player (on paying for them) before, but 
not after, the pack be cut for the deal, may call for 
fresh cards. He must call for two new packs, of 
which the dealer takes his choice. 

GENERAL RULES. 

84. Where a player and his partner have an op- 
tion of exacting from their adversaries one of two 
* In tlie manner prescribed in Law 72. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



29 



penalties, they should agree who is to make the elec- 
tion, but must not consult with one another which 
of the two penalties it is advisable to exact ; if they 
do so consult they lose their right ; * and if either of 
them, with or without consent of his partner, de- 
mand a penalty to which he is entitled, such decision 
is final. 

,Tliis rule does not apply in exacting the penalties for a revoke ; 
partners have then a right to consult. 

85. Any one during the play of a trick, or after the 
four cards are played, and before, but not after, they 
are touched for the purpose of gathering them to- 
gether, may demand that the cards be placed before 
their respective players. 

86. If any one, prior to his partner playing, should 
call attention to the trick — either by saying that it 
is his, or by naming his card, or, without being 
required so to do, by drawing it towards him — the 
adversaries may require that opponent's partner to 
play the highest or lowest of the suit then led, or to 
win or lose f the trick. 

87. In all cases where a penalty has been incurred, 
the offender is bound to give reasonable time for the 
decision of his adversaries. 

88. If a bystander make any remark which calls 
the attention of a player or players to an oversight 
affecting the score, he is liable to be called on, by the 
players only, to pay the stakes and all bets on that 
game or rubber. 

89. A bystander, by agreement among the players, 
may decide any quesion. 

* To demand any penalty. t , refrain from winning. 



30 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



90. A card or cards torn or marked must be either 
replaced by agreement, or new cards called at the 
expense of the table. 

91. Any player may demand to see the last trick 
turned, and no more. Under no circumstances can 
more than eight cards be seen during the play of the 
hand, viz. : the four cards on the table which have 
not have been turned and quitted, and the last trick 
turned. 



THE LA^VS OF WHIST. 



31 



ETIQUETTE OF WHIST. 



The following rules belong to the established Eti- 
quette of Whist. They are not called laws, as it is 
difficult — in some cases impossible — to apply any 
penalty to their infraction, and the only remedy is to 
cease to play with players who habitually disregard 
them. 

Two packs of cards are invariably used at Clubs : 
if possible this should be adhered to. 

Any one, having the lead and several winning cards 
to play, should not draw a second card out of his 
hand until his partner has played to the first trick, 
such act being a distinct intimation that the former 
has played a winning card. 

No intimation whatever, by word or gesture, should 
be given by a player as to the state of his hand, or 
of the game.* 

A player who desires the cards to be placed, or who 
demands to see the last trick, f should do it for his 
own information only, and not in order to invite the 
attention of his partner. 

No player should object to refer to a bystander who 
professes himself uninterested in the game, and able 

♦ The question ** Who dealt ? " is irregular, and if asked should not 
be answered, 
t Or who asks what the trump suit is. 



32 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



to decide any disputed question of facts ; as to who 
played any particular card — whether honors were 
claimed though not scored, or vice versa — etc., etc. 

It is unfair to revoke purposely ; having made a 
revoke, a player is not justified in making a second 
in order to conceal the first. 

Until the players have made such bets as they wish, 
bets should not be made with bystanders. 

Bystanders should make no remark, neither should 
they by word or gesture give any intimation of the 
state of the game until concluded and scored, nor 
should they walk round the table to look at the dif- 
ferent hands. 

No one should look over the hand of a player 
against whom he is betting. 



DUMMY 

Is played by three players. 

One hand, called Dummy's, lies exposed on the 
table. 

The laws are the same as those of Whist, with the 
following exceptions : — 

I. Dummy deals at the commencement of each rubber. 

n. Dummy is not liable to the penalty for a revoke, 
as his adversaries see his cards : should he * re- 
voke and the error not be discovered until the 
trick is turned and quitted, it stands good.f 

* i. «. Dummy's hand. If Dummy's partner revokes, he is liable to 
the usual penalties. 

t And the hand proceeds as though the revoke had not been dis- 
covered. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



38 



III. Diimray being blind and deaf, his Partner is not 
liable to any penalty for an error whence he can 
gain no advantage. Tlins, he may expose some, 
or all of his cards, or may declare that he has 
the game or trick, &c. , without incurring any 
penalty ; if, however, he lead from Dummy's 
hand when he should lead from his own, or 
vice i;e7'5a, a suit maybe called from the hand 
which ought to have led. 



DOUBL5 DUMMY 

Is played by two players, each having a Dummy or 
exposed hand for his partner. The laws of the game 
do not differ from Dummy Whist, except in the fol- 
lowing special law : There is no misdeal, as the deal 
is a disadvantage, 

3 



34 



WHIST. 



CASES AND DECISIONS. 



Card laws are intended to effect two objects : 1. To 
preserve the harmony and determine the ordering of 
the table. Such, for example, are the laws in the 
previous code, which regulate scoring, cutting, shuf- 
fling, &;c., and the miscellaneous rules included under 
the head of Etiquette. 2. To prevent any player 
from obtaining an unfair advantage. 

The word unfair" must be taken in a restricted 
sense. It does not mean intentional unfairness. This 
is not to be dealt with by laws, but by exclusion from 
the card table. In deciding cases of card law, the 
offender should be credited v^ith.'bona fides. It follows 
from this, that offences should not be judged by the 
intention of the i:)layer, but by the amount of injury 
which his irregularity may inflict on the opponents. 

In a perfect code, there should be a penalty for all 
errors or irregularities, by which the player com- 
mitting them, or his side might profit; and on the 
other hand, there should be no penalty for errors by 
which he who commits them, cannot possibly gain an 
advantage. 

Penalties should be proportioned as closely as pos- 
sible to the gain which might ensue to the offender. 
For instance : if the third hand has not played and 
the fourth plays before his partner, the second hand 
is informed whether or not liis X3artner is likely to win 



WHIST. 



35 



the trick. The law, therefore, provides that tlie 
adversaries shall be entitled to call on the second 
player either to win the trick, or not to win it, which- 
ever they please. Say, the fourth hand plays an ace 
out of turn. The second hand may be required to 
win the trick. If he has none of the suit he must 
trump it. In the opposite case, if the fourth hand 
plays a small card, and the second is called on not to 
win the trick, he must play a small card also. In this 
manner, the second player is prevented from benefit- 
ing by the irregular information afforded him. Other 
offences are legislated against in a similar way, the 
point kept in view throughout being, that no player 
shall be allowed to profit by his own wrong doing. 

However carefully a code is drawn up, it will not 
unfrequently happen in practice, that cases occur 
which are but imperfectly provided for. Such cases 
should be referred for decision to some arbitrator. 
The arbitrator will find himself materially assisted by 
keeping well before him the two great objects with 
which the laws have been framed. 

The following general rules will also be found 
useful in guiding him to just decisions : 

Where two or more players are in fault, it should 
be considered with whom the first fault lies, and how 
far it induced or invited the subsequent error of the 
adversary. 

Questions of fact should be settled before the case 
is referred, either by a majority of the players, or, if 
they are divided in opinion, by an onlooker agreed 
to by both parties, the decision of this, referee being 
final. 



36 



WHIST. 



When the facts are agreed to they should be written 
down, and the written statement submitted to the 
judge, who should return a written answer. 

Should it so happen that a case is referred, wherein 
the players are divided in oi^inion as to the facts, the 
arbitrator will do well to decline to give a decision. 
The disputants, however, may be reminded that the 
player whom it is proposed to punish is entitled to 
the benefit of reasonable doubt. 

Questions of interpretation of law should be decided 
liberally, in accordance with the spirit rather than 
the letter of the law. On the other hand, the arbi- 
trator should bear in mind the great inconvenience of 
a lax interpretation of card laws, and having made 
up his mind as to the intention of the law, should 
decide all cases with the utmost strictness. 

The following cases, with decisions, selected from a 
large number which have been brought under the 
author's notice as having occurred in actual play, are 
given in exempHfication of the foregoing remarks. 

CASE I. 

The play of the hand shows that AB (partners) hold 
no honor. The hand is therefore abandoned and 
the adversaries (YZ) score the game. It is then dis- 
covered that Y has only twelve cards, and one of the 
honors is found on the floor. AB then object to 
the score on the ground that YZ only held" three 
honors {vide Law 3). 

Decision — YZ are entitled to score four by honors. 
Y is not obliged to play with his cards in his hand. 



WHIST. 



37 



Besides, the game having been abandojied, Law 59 
comes into operation. The penalty for playing with 
twelve cards is laid down in Law 46. Y is liable for 
any revoke he may have made. 

CAdE II. 

AB claim the game" and score it. After the 
trump card of the following deal is turned up, YZ 
object that AB have not claimed honors {vide Laws 

6 and 7). 

Decision — The honors were claimed within the 
meaning of the law. The objection to the score, if 
made really in ignorance of h^w it accrued, should 
have been taken at once. YZ should not wait the 
completion of the deal, so as to entrap AB on 'a mere 
technicahty. 

Note. This is a good instance of interpretation in 
accordance with the spirit of the law. Laws should 
never be so construed as to inflict a wholly un- 
necessary wrong, as would happen in this case were 
the law insisted on literally. The intention of Law 

7 is to require AB to draw attention to the claim ; 
and this is sufficiently done by the claim of **the 
game." 

CASE III. 

Y throws down his hand and claims " the game." 
B (Y's adversary) thinking that Y is referring only to 
the tricks, says, " You are not game." Y then marks 
four. After the trump card of the following deal is 
turned up, A remarks, " if Y had scored his honors, 
he would have been game." Y then claims the game, 



38 



WHIST. 



on the ground that he made the claim in time, and 
only withdrew it in consequence of B's contradiction. 
Is Y entitled to score the game ? 

Decision — No. Y's claim of the game is irreg- 
ular. He is bound to state in what way he wins it 
{vide Law 6). There is no*evidence that Y was refer- 
ring to his honors when he claimed the game, but 
rather the contrary, as he afterwards withdrew his 
claim and said nothing about honors. 

JSote, This is an example of two players being in 
fault. It seems hard on Y that he should suffer 
through B's mistake ; but it must be borne in mind 
that the confusion was introduced by Y's own irreg- 
ularity, and that th? omission to score honors was 
due to4iis subsequent forgetfulness. 

Compare with Case II. 

CASE IV, 

At the conclusion of the deal the trump card comes 
to the hand on the dealer's left. The dealer requests 
the players to count their cards. The player to the 
dealer's left appropriates a packet of cards lying a 
little to his own right hand, between himself and the 
dealer, and finds twelve cards in it. The other hands 
each contain thirteen. The dealer now claims the 
hand with twelve cards in it as his hand. Must the 
players accept the hands thus given to them, or is it 
a misdeal ? 

Decision — It is a misdeal. The fault is entirely with 
the dealer. If he deals so carelessly that there is any 
doubt as to the ownership of the hands, he must 
apportion them, and having once done so, he must 



WHIST. 



39 



not shift the hands about, so as to make a hand with 
twelve cards in it fall to himself. 

CASE V. 

Y throws down his cards, remarking, "We have 
lost the game." On this, A and B (Y's adversaries) 
throw down their cards. Z retains his hand. AB 
plead that they were misled by Y, and that therefore 
they are not liable to Law 58. 

Decision — A's, Y's, and B's hands are exposed, and 
must be left on the table to be called, each player's 
by the adversary. Z is not bound to abandon the 
game because his partner chooses to do so. Con- 
sequently, Y's remark does not bind Z. A and B 
ought to keep up their cards, until they have 
ascertained that both adversaries have abandoned 
the game. 

Note. The written law is sufficient to decide this 
case {vide Law 58) ; but inasmuch as the irregularity 
in question is a fertile source of disputes, the case has 
been deemed worthy of insertion.- 

CASE VI. 

When it comes to the last trick of a hand, it appears 
that the player who has to lead has no card. What 
is to be done ? 

Decision — (a) If either of the other players remains 
with two cards, it is a misdeal (vide Law 44, paragraph 
iv). (Jb) If the other players have their right number 
of cards, the missing card should be searched for 
(vide Law 70) and when found assigned to the leader, 
who is hable to Law 46. (c) If the missing card 



40 



WHIST. 



cannot be found, the tricks may be searched to find 
what card is wanting, and the absent card assumed 
to have belonged to the player who had but twelve 
cards. 

Note, It may seem that decision c is severe on a 
player playing hond fide with an imperfect pack. But 
each player is bound to count his hand before he 
plays. His playing to the first trick signifies his ac- 
ceptance of the hand. If he accepts an imperfect 
one, he must take the consequences. 

CASE VII. 

Towards the end of a hand a spade is led. The 
third hand, when it comes to his turn to play, lays 
down the ace of trumps (hearts) and says, There's 
the game." He then throws his hand on the table. 
The hand contains several spades. Is it a revoke ? 

Decision — It is a question of fact. If the card was 
exposed in order to save time, it is not a revoke. But 
if the ace of trumps was played to the trick it is a 
revoke, the subsequent throwing down of the cards 
being an act of play, equivalent to playing to the 
following trick {vide Law 73). 

CASE vm. 

The adversary cuts the pack to the dealer, but 
without his consent, i.e., without the dealer's present- 
ing it to be cut. Is it too late to claim a revoke in the 
previous hand? (vide Law 78). 

Decision — It is too late for the player who cut or 
for his partner to claim a revoke, but not too late for 
the adversaries. 



WHIST. 



41 



CASE IK. 

A player revokes, and on discovering the revoke 
before the hand is played out, says in explanation, 
never saw the card; it was hidden behind my 
king of diamonds " — the king of diamonds being still 
in his hand. 

Decision — The king of diamonds is constructively 
an exposed card, and the adversaries may require that 
it be laid on the table to be called. 

CASE X. 

Y leads out of turn. B (Y's adversary) says to his 
partner, Shall we call a suit or not ? " B's partner 
gives no answer. Is the asking the question a con- 
sultation within the meaning of Law 84, although no 
answer is made to it ? 

Decision — Yes. It is the very question Law 84 is 
framed to prevent. B by the question shows that he 
is in doubt as to the policy of calling a suit, and thus 
affords information he has no right to give. Further 
than this, a reply by word of mouth is not necessary 
to constitute a consultation. Silence is an answer. 
The knowledge that a partner is indifferent may con- 
vey information that B has no right to extract. 

Note, The usual formula is, ^' Will you exact the 
penalty, or shall I ? " This question does not bring 
the player under the operation of Law 84. 

CASE XI. 

A leads and the other three players follow suit. A 
plays another card (it not being his lead) and proceeds 



42 



WHIST. 



to gather the five cards into one trick. On being 
told of it, A explains that his attention had been 
diverted, and that he thought he had not played to 
the trick. The adversaries claim to be entitled to 
the penalties for leading out of turn, on the ground 
that the penalty should depend, not on the actual 
intention of the player, but on his possible intention. 

Decision — A has not led out of turn ; he has merely 
exposed a card. The abstract principle pleaded by 
the adversaries is quite sound, but it does not apply 
to this case. There can be no doubt of A*s intention, 
as he proceeds to gather the trick. 



WHIST. 



HISTORICAL. 

The early history of Whist is involved in obscurity. 

All games of high character become perfected by 
degrees ; and Whist, following this rule, has been 
formed by gradual development. As early as the 
beginning of the sixteenth century, a card game 
called triumph or trump was commonly played both 
in England and on the continent. This game in its 
chief feature, viz., the predominance of one particular 
suit, and in its general construction, was so similar to 
Whist, that it may be assumed to have been the game 
from which Whist afterwards developed. 

Trump was played in more than one way ; or, 
rather, there were two distinct games called trump. 
Triumphe or French ruff^vas a game very like ecarte, 
only there was no score for the king ; Trump or 
English ruff-and-honors was a game closely resem- 
bling Whist. 

The earliest mention of trump the author has been 
able to discover is in Berni's Capitolo del Gfioco delta 
Primer a " (chapter on the game of primero) pubhshed 
at Rome in 1526. In this book several card games 
are enumerated, and among them trionfl " a game 



44 



WHIST. 



played by the peasants. It seems probable that trionfi 
is the same game as trump. 

Under the name of la triomphe trump is included 
by Rabelais in the long list of some two hundred and 
thirty games that Gargantua played. The famous 
history was finished about 1545 ; a portion of it was 
published before this date. 

Douce, in his Illustrations of Shakespeare," con- 
cludes from finding trump in this list that we derived 
the game from a French source. But it is more prob- 
able that the game referred to byBerni and Rabelais 
was French ruff, and tha,t trump as played in this 
country was purely of English origin. 

How and when trump or English ruff-and-honors 
originated cannot now be ascertained. It was played 
as early as the time of Henry VIII., for it was taken 
by Latimer to illustrate his text, in a sermon On 
the Card," preached by him at St. Edmund's Church, 
Cambridge, the Sunday before Christmas, 1529. He 
mentions the game under its original and corrupted 
appellations, and clearly alludes to its characteristic 
feature, as the following extracts will show. 

" And where you are wont to celebrate Cliristmass in playing at 
Cards, I intend, by God's Grace, to deal unto you Christ's Cards, 
wherein you'shall perceive Christ's Rule. The game that we phiy 
at shall be called the Triumph, which, if it be well played at. 
he that dealeth shall win ; the Players shall likewise win ; and 
the standers and lookers upon shall do the same. * * * You 
must mark also, that the Triumph must apply to fetch home unto 
him all the other Cards, whatever suit they be of. * * * Then 
further we must say to ourselves, What requireth Christ of a 
Christian man ? Now turn up your Trump, your Heart (Hearts 
is Trump, as I said before), and cast your Trump, your Heart, on 
this card." 



WHIST. 



45 



Later on in the sixteenth century the game of 
trump is not unfrequently referred to, especially in 
old plays. In ''Grammer Gurton's Needle" (1551), 
written by Bishop Still, and said to be the first piece 
performed in England under the name of a Comedy, 
Old Dame Chat thus invites some friends to a game 
at trump : 

** Chat. What Diccon ? Come iiere, ye be no stranger ; 

We be set fast at trump, man, hard by the fyie. 
Thou shalt set on the king, if thou come a little nyer. 
« « « ite « « 

Come hither, Dol ; Dol, sit dowiie and play this game, 
And as thou sawest me do, see thou do even the same ; 
There is five trumps besides the queene, the hindmost 

thou shalt find her ; 
Take hede of Sim Glover's wife, she hath an eie behind 

her.*' 

In Decker's or Dekkar's Belman of London " 
(circa 1550) it is stated that Deceipts [are] practised 
even in the fayrest and most civill companies, at 
primero, sant [piquet], maw [spoil-five], trump, and 
such like games." 

In EHot's Fruits for the French " (1593), trump is 
called " a verie common alehouse game," and Rice, 
i i his Invective against Vices" (printed before 
1600), observes that *^ renouncing the trompe and 
comming in againe " (i.e., revoking intentionally), is 
a common sharper's trick. 

The game of trump is also mentioned by Shakes- 
peare in " Antony and Cleopatra," Act iv., scene 12 
(first published 1628). 

A?JT. My good knave, Eros, now thy Captain is 
Even such a body ; here am I Antony ; 



40 



WHIST. 



Yet cannot hold this visible shape, iny knave. 
I made these Wars for Egypt ; and the Queen, — 
AYhose heart I thought I had, for she had mine ; 
"Wliich, whilst it was mine, had annex'd unto 't 
A million more, now lost, — she, Eros, has 
Packed cards with Csesar, and false-played my glory 
Unto an enemy's triumph^ 

Tlie repeated punning allusions to card-playing in 
this passage leave no doubt as to the reference in the 
last word. Douce (''Illustrations") pointed out its 
real meaning, and also ridiculed Ben Jonson's deri- 
vation of the word trump from tromper. 

There is abundant evidence to show that trump is 
a corruption of the word triumph. In addition to 
the instances already given, the following may be 
quoted; In Cotgrave's ''French and English Dic- 
tionary " (1611), Trioviphe is explained as " the Card- 
game called ruffe or trump." Seymour, in his "Court 
Gamester" {circa 1720), says — *'The term trump 
comes from a corruption of a word tiiumph; for 
wherever they are they are attended with conquest." 

The derivation of the word ruff or ruffe has caused 
mrch speculation, and has never been satisfactorily 
settled. Ruffe seems to have been used as a synonym 
for trump early in the seventeenth centmy, as ap- 
X^ears from the extract from Cotgrave's " Dictionary." 
Nares, in his Glossary," says — " Ruff meant a trump 
card, charta dominoirix ; " even at the present day, 
many Whist players speak of ruffing, i.e. trumxDing ; 
and, in the expression a cross-ruff, the word ruff is 
preserved to the exclusion of the word trump. 

The game of ruff-and-Jionors, if not the same as 
trump or ruff, was probably the same game, with the 



WHIST. 



47 



addition of certain advantages to the four highest 
cards of the trump suit. Rabelais includes in his 
list a game called les Honeurs,'' but whether it 
had any affinity to ruff-and-honors is doubtful. In 
Shufling, cutting and dealing in a game atPickquet 
being acted from the year 1653 to 1658 by O.P. and 
others'' (1659), the "Old Foolish Christmas Grame 
with Honors" is mentioned. Some writers are of 
opinion that trump was originally played without 
honors ; but as no description of trump without hon- 
ors is known to exist, their view must be taken as 
conjectural. In 1674, Charles Cotton, the poet, pub- 
lished a description of ruif-and-honors in *'The Com- 
pleat Gramester : or Instructions how to play at Bil- 
liards, Trucks, Bowls, and Chess. Together with pJl 
manner of usual and most Gentile Games, either on 
Cards or Dice." Cotton gives a drawing of the game 
of ^* English Ruff and Honors," (see frontispiece) and 
thus describes it : — 

** At Riiff and Honors, by some called Slamm, you have in the 
Pack all the Deuces, and the reason is, because four playing 
having dealt twelve a-piece, there are four left for the Stock, the 
uppermost whereof is turn'd up, and that is Trumps, he that 
hath the Ace of that Ruffs ; that is, he takes in those four Cards, 
and lays out four others in their lieu; the four Honors are the Ace, 
King, Queen, and knave ; he that hath three Honors in his own 
hand, his partner not having the fourth, sets up Eight by Cards, 
that is two tricks ; if he hath all four, then Sixteen, that is four 
tricks ; it is all one if two Partners make them three or four 
between them, as if one had them. If the Honors are equally 
divided among the Gamesters of each side, then they say Hon- 
ors are split. If either side are at Eight Groats he hath the 
benefit of calling Can-ye, if he hath two Honors in his hand, and 
if the other answers one, the game is up, which is nine in all, 
but if he hath more than two he shows them, and then it is all 



48 



WHIST. 



one and the same thing ; but if he forgets to call after playing a 
trick, he loseth the advantage of Can-ye for that deal. 

" All Cards are of value as they are superior one to another, 
as a Ten wins a nine if not Trumps, so a Queen a Knave, in like 
manner ; but the least Trump will win the highest Card of every 
other Card [suit] ; where note the Ace is the highest " 

This game was clearly Whist in an imperfect form. 
Whist is not mentioned by Shakespeare, nor by any 
writer (it is believed) of the Elizabethan era. The 
introduction of the name whist or whisk would ap- 
pear to have taken place early in the seventeenth 
century. 

The meaning of the word is unknown. It has been 
suggested, and the suggestion is worthy of considera- 
tion, that whisk is derived by substitution from ruff, 
for both of them signify a piece of lawn used as an 
ornament to the dress. The commonly received 
opinion is that whist means silence. But this loses 
sight of the fact that the original appellation was 
whisk. The first known appearance of the word in 
print is in the Motto" of Taylor, the Water Poet 
(1621). Taylor spells the word whisk. Speaking of 
the prodigal, he says : — 

" The prodigall's estate, like to a flux, 
The mercer, draper, and the silkman suckes ; 

****** 

He flings his money free with carelessnesse. 

At novum, mumchancC; mischance (chuse ye which), 

At one-and-thirty, or at poore-and-rich, 

Ruffe, slam, trump, nody, whisk, hole, sant, new cut. 

The word continued to be spelt whisk for about 
forty years, when the earliest known use of the pres- 



49 



ent spelling obtained, in a passage quoted by John- 
son, from the second part of Hudibras (spurious) 
published in 1663 : 

" But what was this ? A game at Whist 
Unto our Plowden-Canonist." 

After this, the word is spelt indifferently, whisk oi 
whist. Barrington says that Whist is not named in 
the first edition of "The Compleat Gamester," but 
this is an error. In the edition of 1674 (which ap- 
pears to be the first), Cotton, who never uses or al- 
ludes to the earlier name whisk, says, '' Ruff and 
Honors {alias Slamni) and Wliist, are Games so com- 
monly known in England, in all parts thereof, that 
every Child almost of Eight Tears old, hath a com- 
petent knowledge in that recreation." 

After describing ruff-and-honors (see the passage 
quoted, pp. 47, 48), Cotton adds, "Whist is a Game 
not much differing from this, only they put out the 
Deuces and take in no stock ; and is called Whist 
from the silence that is to be observed in the play : 
they deal as before, playing four, two of a side * * 
to each Twelve a-pieee, and the Trump is the bot- 
tom Card. The manner of crafty playing, the num- 
ber of the Game 2s'ine, Honors, and dignity of other 
Cards, are all ahke, and he tlaat wins most tricks is 
most forward to win the set." 

Cotton's work was afterwards incorporated with 
Seymour's Court Gamester (first published 1719;. 
The earlier editions contain no Whist, but after the 
two books were united (about 1734), Seymour says, 

Whist, vulgarly called whisk. The original de- 
nomination of this game is Whist [here Seymour is 
mistaken], or the silent game at cards." And again, 

4 



5( 



WHIST. 



* Talking is not allowed at Whist ; the very word 
implies * Hold your Tongue.' " 

Dr. Johnson does not positively derive Whist from 
the inter jectio silentium imp er arts ; he cautiously 
explains Whist to be *'a game at cards, requiring 
close attention and silence." Nares,in his Glossary, 
has Whist, an interjection commanding silence ; " 
and he adds, " That the name of the game of Whist 
is derived from this, is known, I presume, to all who 
play or do not play." He, however, in his preface, 
well remarks that he knows the extreme fallacious- 
ness of the science of etymology when based on mere 
similarity of sound;" but in the case of Whist, he 
has allowed similarity of sound to master his judge- 
ment. Looking to the early spelUng, whisk, it ap- 
pears to the author that the whist-silence theory has 
been taken for granted too hastily. 

While Whist was undergoing these changes of 
name and of character, there was for a time associ- 
ated with it another title, viz., swabbers or swobbers. 
Fielding, in his History of the life of the late Mr. 
Jonathan Wild, the Great," records that when the 
ingenious Count La Ruse was domiciled with Mr. 
Geoffrey Snap, in 1682, or, in other words, was in a 
spunging-house, the Count beguiled the tedium of his 
in-door existence by playing at Whisk-and-Swabbers, 
**the game then in the chief vogue." Swift also, in 
his Essay on the Fates of Clergymen" (1728), ridi- 
cules Archbishop Tenison for not understanding the 
meaning of swabbers. It appears that a clergyman 
was recommended to the Archbishop for preferment, 
when His Grace said, he had heard that the clergy- 
man used to play at Whist and swobbers ; that as to 



WHIST. ^ 



51 



playing now and then a sober game at WMst, it 
might be pardoned ; but he coifld not digest those 
wicked swobbers." Johnson defines swobbers as 
four privileged cards used incidentally in betting 
at Whist." It has been conjectured by later writers 
that swabbers were identical with the honors ; but 
this is an error. In Captain Francis Grose's ''Clas- 
sical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue " (1785), swab- 
bers are said to be " The ace of hearts, knave of clubs, 
ace and deuce of trumps at Whist." The Hon. Daines 
Barrington (writing in 1787), says, that at the begin- 
ning of the century, whisk was "played with what 
were called swabbers, which were possibly so termed, 
because they who had certain cards in their hand 
were entitled to take up a share of the stake, indepen- 
dent of the general event of the game." This was 
probably the true office of the swabbers. They, how- 
ever, soon went out of general use, but the author 
has heard that they still linger in some local coteries. 
Mr. R. B. Wormald writes thus respecting them in 
1873 : — Being driven by stress of weather to take 
shelter in a sequestered hostelry on the Berkshire 
bank of the Thames, he found four persons immersed 
in the game of Whist : "In the middle of the hand, 
one of the players, with a grin that almost amounted 
to a chuckle, and a vast display of moistened thumb, 
spread out upon the table the ace of trumps ; where- 
upon the other three deliberately laid down their 
hands, and forthwith severally handed over the sum 
of one penny to the fortunate holder of the card in 
question. On inquiry, we were informed that the 
process was technically known as a * swap ' (qy. swab 
or svvabber), and was de rigueur in all properly con- 
stituted whist circles." 



52 



^ WHIST. 



After the swabbers were droppep (and it is prob- 
able that they were* not in general use in the eigh- 
teenth century), our national card game became 
known simply as Whist, though still occasionally 
spelt whisk. The Hon. Daines Barrington (Archaeo- 
logia, Vol. viii.) says, that Whist in its infancy was 
chiefly confined to the servants' hall. That the game 
had not yet become fashionable is evident from the 
disparaging way in which it is referred to by writers 
of the period. In Farquhar's comedy of the Beaux's 
Stratagem" (1707), Mrs. Sullen, a fine lady from Lon- 
don, speaks in a contemptuous vein of the rural 
accomplishments of drinking fat ale, playing at 
whisk, and smoaking tobacco." Pope also classes 
Whist as a country squire's game, in his Epistle to 
Mrs. Teresa Blount" (1715)— 

" Some Squire, i^erhaps, you take delight to rack, 
Whose game is Whisk, whose treat a toast in sack." 

Thomson, in his Autumn" (1730), describes how 
after a heavy hunt dinner — 

" Whist awhile, 
Walks his dull round beneath a cloud of smoke, 
Wreath' d fragrant from the jpipe." 

Early in the century the points of the game rose 
from nine to ten ("nine in all." Cotton, 1709 ; ^'ten 
in all," Cotton, 1721; '^nine in all,~" Cotton, 1725; 
*'tenin all," Seymour, 1734, rectified according to 
the present standard of play"). Every subsequent 
edition of Seymour (with which Cotton was incorpo- 
rated) makes the game ten up. It seems likely that, 
simultaneously with this change, or closely following 
it, the practice of playing with the entire pack in-' 



WHIST. 



53 



stead of with but forty-eight cards obtained. Thif 
improvement introduced the odd tricky an element 
of the greatest interest in modern Whist. 

At this period (early part of the eighteenth century) 
there was a mania for card playing in all parts of 
Europe, and in all classes of society, but Whist had 
not as yet found favor in the highest circles. Piquet, 
and Ombre, and Quadrille, were the principal games 
of the fashionable world. But about 1728, the game 
rose out of its comparative obscurity. 

A party of gentlemen (according to Daines Bar- 
rington), of whom the first Lord Folkestone was 
one, used at this date to frequent the Crown Coffee- 
house, in Bedford Row, where they studied Whist 
scientifically. They must have made considerable 
progress in the game, to judge by the following rules 
which they laid down: — *'Lead from the strong 
suit ; study your partner's hand ; and attend to the 
score." 

Shortly after this, the celebrated Edmond Hoyle, 
the father of the game, published his "Short Trea- 
tise " (1742-3). About Hoyle's antecedents, but little 
is known. He was born in 1672 ; it is said he was 
educated for the bar. It has been stated that he 
was born in Yorkshire, but this is doubtful. At all 
events, the author, by personal inquiry, has positive- 
ly ascertained that he did not belong to the family of 
Yorkshire Hoyles, who acquired estates near Halifax 
temp Edward III. It has also been stated that Hoyle 
was appointed registrar of the prerogative court at 
Dubhn, in 1742. This, however, is unlikely. At 
that time, Hoyle was probably living at Bath, at 



54 



WHIST. 



least his treatise was published there, and he after- 
wards resided in Queen Square, London. Hoyle was 
engaged in writing on games, and in giving lessons 
playing now and then a sober game at Whist, it 
might be pardoned ; but he could not digest those 
on Whist, at the time he is supposed to have held 
the appointment in question. The fact is, the name 
Edmund or Edmond is common in both the York" 
shire and Irish families of Hoyle ; and probably one 
Hoyle has been mistaken for another. 

Hoyle became famous as soon as he avowed the 
authorship of the Short Treatise." It was origin- 
ally published anonymously. It seems probable that 
Hoyle originally drew up some notes for the use of 
the pupils to whom he gave lessons in Whist, as his 
original edition speaks of purchasers of the Treatise 
in Manuscript disposed of the last winter," and also 
that there was ^' a Treatise on the Game at Whist 
lately dispersed among a few Hands at a Guinea 
Price," and further, that the author of it has fram'd 
an Artificial Memory which takes not off your Atten- 
tion from your Game ; and, if required, he is ready 
to communicate it upon Payment of one Guinea* 
And also. He will explain any Cases in the Book, 
upon Payment of one Guinea more." 

The value of the Short Treatise," and its rapid 
success, caused surreptitious copies to be circulated. 
To secure his property, Hoyle printed the manuscript, 
and registered it at Stationers' Hall in November, 
1742. It is said that the treatise ran through five 
editions in one year, and that Hoyle received a large 
sum for the copyright. This last statement, how- 



WHIST. 



55 



ever, requires verification ; at all events, Hoyle con- 
tinued for years to sign every copy personally, as tht 
proprietor of the copyright. This was done in order 
\o protect the property from further piracy, as the 
address to the reader shows. 

The following is a fac-simile of Hoyle's signature, 
taken from the fourth edition : — 




In the fifteenth edition the signature is impressed 
from a wood block, and in the seventeenth it was an- 
nounced that Mr. Ho^de was dead. He died in Wel- 
bank (qy. Welbeck) Street, Cavendish Square, on 
August 27th, 1769, aged 97. 

One effect of Hoyle's publication was to draw forth 
a witty skit, entitled *'The Humors of Whist. A 
Dramatic Satire, as acted every day at White's and 
other Coffee-Houses and Assemblies" (1743). The 
pamphlet commences with an advertisement mimick- 
ing Hoyle's address to the reader. The prologue to 
the play is supposed to be spoken by a waiter at 
White's. 

" Who will believe that Man could e'er exist, 
Who spent near half an Age in studying Whist ? 
Grew gray with Calculation — Labor hard 
As if Life's Business centred in a Card ? 
That such there is, let roe to those appeal, 
Who with such liberal Hands reward his ZeaL 
Lo ! Whist he makes a science, and our Peers 
Deign to turn School Boys in their riper Years.'* 

The principal characters are . Prof essor Whisto i 



56 



WHIST. 



(Hoyle), who gives lessons in the game of Whist ; Sii 
Calculation Puzzle, a passionate admirer of Whist, 
who imagines himself a good player, yet always 
loses 3 Sharpers, Pupils of the Professor, and Cocao, 
Master of the Chocolate-house, The sharpers are 
disgusted at the appearance of the book. 

" LuRCHUM. Thou knowest we have the Honor to be admitted 
into the hest Company, which neither our Birth nor Fortunes en- 
title us to, merely for our Reputation as good TFTiis^-Players. 
Shuffle. Very well ! 

Lurch. But if this damn'd Book of the Professor's answers, as 
he pretences, to put Players more upon a Par, what will avail our 
superior Skill in the Game ? We are undone to all Intents and 
Purposes. * * * We must bid adieu to White's, George's, 
Brown's, and all the polite Assemblies about Town, and that's 
enough to make a Man mad instead of thouglitful. 

SnuF. Damn him, I say, — Could he find no other Employment 
for forty Years together, than to study how to circumvent younger 
Brothers, and such as us, who live by our Wits ? A Man that 
discovers the Secrets of any Profession deserves to be sacrificed, 
and I would be the first, Lurchum, to cut the Professor's Throat 
for what he has done, but that I think I have pretty well defeated 
the malevolent Effect of his fine spun Calculations. 

Lurch. As how, dear Shuffle ? Thou revivest me. 

Shuf. I must confess the Publication of his Treatise gave me 
at first some slight Alarm ; but I did not, like thee, Lurchum, 
indulge in melancholy desponding Thoughts : On the contrary, I 
called up my Indignation to my Assistance, and have ever since 
been working upon a private Treatise on Signs at Whist, by Avay 
of counter Treatise to his, and which, if I mistake not, totally 
overthrows his System." 

On the other hand, the gentlemen are in raptures. 

" Sir Calculation Puzzle. The Progress your Lordship has 
made for the time you have study' d under the Professor is won- 
derful. — Pray, has your Lordship seen the dear Man to-day ? 

Lord Slim. yes. — His Grace sate him down at my House, 
and I have just lent him my Chariot into the City. — How do you 



WHIST. 



57 



like the last edition of his Treatise with the Appendix,* Sir Cal- 
culation ? I mean that signed with his Nanie.f 

Sm Cal. Gad, my Lord, there never was so excellent a Book 
printed. — I'm quite in Plaptures with it — I will eat with it — sleep 
with it — go to Court with it— I go to Parliament with it — go 
to Church with it. I pronounce it the Gospel of Whist-Players ; 
and the Laws of the Game ought to be wrote in golden Letters, 
and hung up in Coffee-houses, as much as the Ten Command- 
ments in Parish Churches. 

Sm John MEDni^i. Ha ! Ha ! Ha ! you speak of the Book 
with the Zeal of a primitive Father. 

Sm Cal. Not half enough, Sm John — the Calculations t are so 
exact ! * * * his Observations § are quite masterly ! his Rules i| 
so comprehensive ! his Cautions so judicious ! There are such 
Variety of Cases in his Treatise, and the Principles are so new, 
I want Words to express the Author, and can look on him in no 
other Light than as a second Xeicton." 

The way in which Sir Calculation introduces 
Hoyle's Calculations of Chances is very amusing. 

Sm John. 'Twas by some such laudable Practices, I suppose, 
that you suffered in your last Affair with Lurchu^l 

Sm Cal. O Gad, No, Sir John — Never any thing was fairer, 
nor was ever any thing so critical. — We were nine all. The ad- 

* The author of this treatise did promise if it met with approba- 
tion, to make an addition to it by way of Appendix, which he has 
done accordingly.'* — Hoyle. 

t Authorized as revised and corrected under his OAvn hand. — Hoyle. 

X " Calculations for those who will bet the odds on any points of 
the score," Sza. — "Calculations directing with moral certainty, how 
to play well any hand or game," Szo,.— Hoyle. 

§ " Games to be played with certain observations," &c. — Hoyle. 

\\ *'Some general rules to be observed," &c.— "Some particular 
rules to be observed," &c. — Hoyle. 

^ A caution not to part with the command of your adversaries* 
great suit," &c.— Hoyle. 
** With a variety of Cases added in the Appendix."— 5b?/ Ze. 



58 



WHIST. 



verse Party had 3, and we 4 Tricks. All the trumps were out. 1 
had Queen and two small Clubs, with the Lead. Let me see — It 
was about 222 and 3 Halves to — 'gad, I forgot how many — that 
my Partner had the Ace and King — let me recollect — ay — that he 
had one only was about 31 to 2G. That he had not both of them 
/17 to 2, — and that he had not one, or both, or neither, some 25 to 
32. So I, according to the Judgment of the Game, led a Club, my 
Partner takes it with the King. Then it was exactly 481 for us to 
222 against ^/ie77i. He returns the same Suit ; I win it with my 
Queen, and return it again ; but the Devil take that Lurchum, 
by passing his Ace twice, he took the Trick, and having 2 more 
Clubs and a 13th Card, I gad, all was over.— But they both al- 
low'd I play*d admirably well for all that." 

The following passage from the same pamphlet 
mentions the Crown— probably the Crown Coffee- 
house — and it has been inferred from this that Hoyle 
himself might have been one of Lord Folkestone's 
party. 

" Young Jobber [A pupil of the Professor's]. Dear Mr. Pro- 
fessor, I can never repay you. You have given me such an In- 
sight by this Visit, I am quite another Thing. — I find I knew 
nothing of the Game before ; tho' I can assure you, I have been 
reckoned a First-rate Player in the City a good while— nay, for 
that Matter, I make no bad Figure at the Croion— and don't de- 
spair, by your Assistance, but to make one at Whitens soon." 

Hoyle is also spoken of in his professional capacity 
in the Rambler" of May 8, 1750. A lady writes, 

As for play, I do think I may indulge in that, now 
I am my own mistress. Papa made me drudge at 
Whist till I was tired of it ; and far from wanting a 
head, Mr. Hoyle, when he had not given me above 
forty lessons, said I was one of his best scholars." 

Again, in " The Gentleman's Magazine" for Feb- 
ruary, 1755, a writer, professing to give the autobi- 
ography of a fashionable physician, says, ^' Hoyle 



WHIST. 



59 



tutored me in several games at cards, and under the 
nama of guarding me from being cheated, insensibly 
gave me a taste for sharping." 

In the middle of the eighteenth century, Whist 
was regularly played in fashionable society. In 
**Tom Jones," Lady Bellaston, Lord Fellamar, and 
others, are represented as indulging in a rubber. 
Hoyle also comes in for notice in the following pas- 
sage in the same work : I happened to come home 
several hours before my usual time, when I found 
four gentlemen of the cloth at Whist by my fire ; — 
and my Hoyle, sir, — my best Hoyle, which cost me a 
guinea, lying open on the table, with a quantity of 
porter spilled on one of the most material leaves of 
the whole book. This, you will allow, was provok- 
ing; but I said nothing till the rest of the honest 
com^Dany were gone, and then gave the fellow a gen- 
tle rebuke ; who, instead of expressing any concern, 
made me a pert answer, * That servants must have 
their diversions as well as other people ; that he was 
sorry for the accident which had happened to the 
book, but that several of his acquaintance had bought 
the same for a shilling ; and that I might stop as 
much in his wages, if I pleased.' " 

In an epic poem on Whist," by Alexander Thom- 
son, which appeared in 1791, Hoyle was thus in- 
voked — 

" Whist, tlieii, delightful Whist, my theme shall be, 
A.nd first I'll try to trace its pedigree, 
And shew what sage and comprehensive mind 
Gave to the world a pleasure so refiu'd : 
Then shall the verse its various charms display, 
Which bear from ev'ry game the palm away ; 



60 



WHIST. 



And, last of all, those rules and maxims tell, 
Whicli give the envied pow'r to play it well. 

But first (for such the mode) some tuneful shade 
Must be invok'd, the vent'rous Muse to aid. 
Cremona's poet shall I first address, 
Who paints with skill the mimic war of chess, 
And India's art in Roman accents sings ; 
Or him who soars on far sublimer wings, 
Belinda's bard, who taught his liquid lay 
At Ombre's studious game so well to play ? 

But why thus vainly hesitates the Muse, 
In idle doubt, what guardian pow'r to chuse ? 
What pow'r so well can aid her daring toil, 
As the bright spirit of immortal Hoyle ? 
By whose enlighten' d efforts Whist became 
A sober, serious, scientific game ; 
To whose unwearied pains, while here below, 
The great, th' important privilege we owe, 
That random strokes disgrace our play no morf 
But skill presides, where all was chance before. 

Come then, my friend, my teacher, and my guide, 
Where'er thy shadowy ghost may now reside ; 
Perhaps (for Nature ev'ry change defies. 
Nor ev'n death our ruling passion dies) 
With fond regret it hovers still, unseen. 
Around the tempting boards array' d in green ; 
' Still witli delight its fav'rite game regards. 
And tho' it plays no more o'erlooks tlie cards. 

Come then, thou glory of Britannia's isle, 
On this attem]:)t i^ropitious deign to smile ; 
Let all thy skill th' unerring page inspire, 
And all thy zeal my raptur'd bosom fire. 

Hoyle's name also finds a place in Don Juan. By- 
ron, in saying that Troy owes to Homer what Whist 
owes to Hoyle, scarcely does justice to Hoyle, who 
was rather the founder that the historian of Whist. 

The Short Treatise " appeared just in the nick 



WHIST. 



61 



of time "when Whist was rising in repute, and when 
card playing was the rage. The work became the 
authority almost from the date of its appearance. 

In 1760, the laws of the game were revised by the 
members of White's and Saunder's Chocolate-houses, 
then the headquarters of fashionable play. These 
make the game five points instead of ten, in order to 
revised laws (nearly all Hoyle) are given in every 
edition of Hoyle from this date. Hoyle's laws, as they 
were called, guided all Whist coteries for a hundred 
and four years ; when the Arlington (now Turf) and 
Portland Clubs, re-revised the code of the Chocolate- 
houses. The laws adopted by these Clubs in 1864, 
which have by this time (1874) found their way into 
all Whist circles, deposed Hoyle, and are now the 
standard by which disputed points are determined. 

One of the chief seats of card playing, and conse- 
quently, of Whist playing, during the eighteenth 
century, was Bath. Even Mr. Pickwick is depicted 
playing Whist there with Miss Bolo, Mr. Bantam, 
M. C., and the Dowager Lady Snuffanuff, in a pas- 
sage too well known to require quotation, though Mr. 
Pickwick's visit was at a date when the chief glories 
of Bath had departed. Hoyle's first edition, it will 
be remembered, was published at Bath, as also was 
Thomas Mat[t]hews' ''Advice to the Young Whist 
Player " (about 1805) — a sound and useful contribu- 
tion to Whist literature. 

Early in this century, the points of the game were 
altered from ten to five, and calling honors was 
abolished. It is doubtful whether this change was 
for the better. In the author's opinion Long Whist 
(ten up) is a far finer game than Short Whist (five 



63 



WHIST. 



up); Short Whist, however, has taken such a hold, 
that there is no chance of our reverting to the former 
game. According to Mr. Clay, the alteration took 
place under the following circumstances : Some 
sixty or seventy years back (1804-1814), Lord Peter- 
borough having one night lost a large sum of money, 
the friends with whom he was playing proposed to 
give the loser a chance, at a quicker game, of recover- 
ing his loss. The late Mr. Hoare, of Bath, a very good 
Whist player, and without a superior at Piquet, was 
one of the party, and has more than once told me 
the story. The new game was found to be so lively, 
and money changed hands with such increased rapid- 
ity, that these gentlemen and their friends, all of 
them members of the leading Clubs of the day, con- 
tinued to play it. It became general in the Clubs, — 
thence was introduced to private houses, — travelled 
into the country, — went to Paris, — and has long since 
entirely superseded the Whist of Hoyle's day." 

Long Whist had long been known in France, but 
it was not a popular game in that countr3\ Hoyle 
has been several times translated into French. Whist 
was played by Louis XV., and under the first Empire 
was a favorite game with Josephine and Marie Louise. 
It is on record ("Diaries of a Lady of Quality," 2d 
Ed. p. 128), that Napoleon used to play Whist at 
Wiirtemburg, but not for money, and that he played 
ill and inattentively. One evening, when the Queen 
Dowager was playing against him with her husband 
and his daughter (the Queen of Westphalia, the wife 
of Jerome), the King stopped Napoleon, who was 
taking up a trick that did not belong to him, saying, 

Sire, on ne joue pas ici en conquerant." After the 



WHIST. 



63 



restoration, Whist was taken up in France more en- 
thusiastically. The ]S"obles," says a French writer, 
*'had gone to England to learn to Think, and they 
brought back the thinking game with them.'^ Tal- 
leyrand was a Whist player, and his mot to the 
youngster who boasted his ignorance of the game is 
well known, '^Vous ne savez pas done le Whiste, 
jeune homme ? Quelle triste vieillesse vous vous pre- 
parez ! " Charles X. is reported to have been playing 
Whist at St. Cloud, on July 29, 1830, when the tri- 
color was waving on the Tuileries, and he had lost 
his throne. 

It is remarkable that the finest Whist player" 
who ever lived should have been, according to Mr. 
Clay, a Frenchman, M. Deschapelles (born 1780, died 
1847). , He pubUshed in 1839 a fragment of a Traite 
du Whiste," which treats mainly of the laws, and is 
of but little value to the Whist player. 

Before leaving this historical sketch, a few words 
may be added respecting the modern literature of the 
game. So far as the present work is concerned, its 
raison d'etre is explained in the preface to the first 
edition. How far it has fulfilled the conditions of its 
being, it is not for the author to say. It was followed, 
however, by two remarkable books, which call for a 
short notice. 

In 1864, appeared Short Whist," by James Clay. 
Mr. Clay's work is an able dissertation on the game, 
by the most brilliant player of his day. He was 
Chairman of the Committee appointed to revise the 
Laws of Whist in 1863. He sat in Parliament for 
many years, being M.P. for Hull at the time of his 
death, in 1873. 



64 



WHIST. 



In 1865, William Pole, F.R.S., Mus. Doc, Oxon, 
published "The Theory of the Modern Scientific 
Game of Whist," a work which contains a lucid ex- 
jjlanation of the fundamental principles of scientific 
play, addressed especially to novices, but of consider- 
able value to players of all grades. 

These books exhibit the game both theoretically 
and practically, in the perfect state at which it has 
arrived during the two centuries that have elapsed 
since Whist assumed a definite shape and took its 
present name. 



PART I. 

GENERAL PROCIPLES. 



INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 

Before entering on an analysis of the general prin- 
ciples of the Game of Whist, it is advisable to explain 
shortly on what foundation these principles rest ; for 
it might be supposed that a demonstration t)f the 
propositions contained in these pages is about to be 
offered ; that the chances for and against all possible 
systems of play have been calculated ; and that the 
one here upheld can be proved to be certainly right, 
and all others certainly wrong. Such a view would 
be altogether erroneous. The problem is far too in- 
tricate to admit of being treated with mathematical 
precision. The conclusion that the chances are in 
favor of a certain line of play is not arrived at by 
abstract calculation, but by general reasoning, con- 
firmed by the accumulated experience of practised 
players. The student must not, therefore, expect 
absolute proof. He must frequently be satisfied if the 
reasons given appear weighty in themselves, and 
none weightier can be suggested on the other side ; 
and also with the assurance that the method of play 
recommended in this work is for the most part that 
which, having stood the test of time, is generally 
adopted. 

5 (65) 



66 



WHIST. 



THE riEST HAND OR LEAD. 



The considerations that determine the most advan- 
tageous card to lead at the commencement of a hand 
differ from those which regulate the lead at other 
periods ; for, at starting, the Doctrine of Probabilities 
is the only guide ; while, as the hand advances, each 
player is able, with more or less certainty, to draw 
inferences as to the position of some of the remaining 
cards. The number of the inferences, and the cer- 
tainty with which they can be drawn from the previous 
play, constantly increase ; so that it not unf requently 
happens that, towards the termination of a hand, the 
position of every material card is known. 

In treating of the lead, it will be most convenient 
to begin by examining the principles which govern 
the original lead. The application of these principles 
will require to be somewhat modified in the case of 
trumps, as will appear hereafter. 

1. LEAD ORIGINALLY FROM YOXTR 
STRONGEST SUIT. 

The first question that arises is. Which is the 
strongest suit ? A suit may be strong in two distinct 
ways. 1. It may contain more than its proportion 
of high cards. For example, it may contain two or 



WHIST. 



67 



more honors — one honor in each suit being the average 
for each hand. 2. It may consist of more than the 
average number of cards, in which case it is a nu- 
merically strong or long suit. Thus a suit of four 
cards has numerical strength ; a suit of five cards 
great numerical strength. On the other hand a suit 
of three cards is numerically weak. 

In selecting a suit for the lead, numerical strength 
is the principal point to look to ; for it must be borne 
in mind that aces and kings are not the only cards 
which make tricks ; twos and threes may become 
quite as valuable when the suit is established— i.e., 
when the higher cards of the suit are exhausted. 
To obtain for your own small cards a value that does 
not intrinsically belong to them, and to prevent the 
adversary from obtaining it for his, is evidently an 
advantage. Both these ends are advanced by choosing 
for your original lead the suit in which you have the 
greatest numerical strength ; for you may establish 
a suit of this description, while, owing to your strength, 
it is precisely the suit which the adversary has the 
smallest chance of establishing against you. A suit 
that is numerically weak, though otherwise strong, is 
far less eligible. 

Suppose, for example, you have five cards headed 
by (say) a ten in one suit, and ace, king, and one 
other (say the two) in another suit. If you lead from 
the ace, king, two suit, all your power is exhausted 
as soon as you have parted with the ace and king, 
and you have given the holder of numerical strength 
a capital chance of estabhshing the suit. It is true 
that this fortunate person may be your partner ; but 
it is twice as hkely that he is your adversary, since 



68 



wmsT. 



you have two adversaries and only one partner. On 
the other hand, if you lead from the five suit, though 
your chance of estabhshing it is slight, you, at all 
events, avoid assisting your adversary to establish 
his ; the ace and king of your three suit, still remain- 
ing in your hand, enable you to prevent the establish- 
ment of that suit, and may procure you the lead at 
an advanced period of the hand. This we shall find 
as we proceed is a gi-eat advantage, especially if, in 
the course of play, you are left with all the unplayed 
cards, or long cards, of your five suit. 

The best suit of all to lead from is, of course, one 
which combines both elements of strength. 

In opening a suit, there is always the danger of 
finding your partner verj' weak, or of leading up to a 
tenace the best and third best cards, or the 

second best guarded) in the hand of the fourth player. 
If you lead from a very strong suit, these dangers are 
more than compensated for by the advantages just 
explained ; if your best suit is only moderately strong, 
the lead is not profitable, but rather the reverse. If 
all your suits are weak, the lead is very disadvan- 
tageous. The hand, however weak, must hold one 
suit of four at least, and this, if only headed by a ten 
or a nine, should generally be chosen. Being unable 
to strike the adversary, you take the best chance of 
not assisting him. 

It follows that a suit consisting of a single card is a 
very disadvantageous one to lead from ; yet no lead 
is more common, even among players of some ex- 
perience. The reason assigned in favor of this lead is 
the possibihty of making small trumps. But it is 
important to observe, that you stand very nearly as 



WHIST. 



69 



good a chance of making trumps by waiting for some 
one else to open the suit. If the suit is opened by the 
strong hand, your barrenness will not be suspected ; 
you will be able, if necessary, to win the second round, 
while you will be free from the guilt of having sacri- 
ficed any high card your partner may have possessed 
in the suit, or of having assisted in estabhshing a suit 
for the adversary. Again, your partner, if strong in 
trumps, will very likely draw yours, and then return 
your lead, imagining you led from strength. If, indeed, 
he is a shrewd player, he will, after being taken in 
once or twice, accommodate his game to yours ; but 
fie can never be sure of the character of your lead, 
and may often miss a great game by not being able 
to depend upon you. If you have great numerical 
strength in trumps, the evils of a single-card lead 
are lessened ; but in this case, as will hereafter be 
shown, it is generally right to lead trulnps. In the 
opinion of the author, it may be laid down as an 
axiom, that in plain suits (i.e., in suits not trumps) 
an original lead from a single card is in no case 
defensible. 

Many players will not lead from a strong suit if 
headed by a tenace ; preferring, for instance, to lead 
from ten, nine, three, to ace, queen, four, two. They 
argue, that by holding up the ace, queen suit, they 
stand a better chance of catching the king. So far 
they are right ; but they purchase this advantage too 
dearly ; for the probable loss from leading the weak 
suit may be taken as greater than the probable gain 
from holding up the tenace; 

Wliich card of the strong suit should' he led origi 
nally ? — The key to this problem is furnished by the 



70 



WHIST. 



remark, that it conduces to the ultimate establish- 
ment of a suit to keep the high or commanding cards 
of it in the hand that has numerical strength. In 
the suit of your own choosing, you are presumably 
stronger than your partner ; it is therefore undesir- 
able at once to part with your high cards. Hence it 
is best, in general, to lead the smallest (but see Appen- 
dix A, p. 267). Your partner, actuated by a desiiv to 
assist in estabhshing your strong suit, will plr*/ his 
highest card to your lead {see Play of Third Hand, p. 
94), and, if he fails to win the trick, will, at all events, 
force a higher card from the fourth player, and so 
clear the suit for you. Another reason in favor of 
leading the lowest is, that it increases your chance of 
making tricks in the first^two rounds. For in the 
first round of a suit the second hand generally puts 
on his smallest card, as will be seen hereafter. If, 
therefore, yoG originally lead the smallest, holding 
ace and others, the first trick will, in all probability, 
lie between your i^artner and the last player ; and 
since there is no reason why the fourth player should 
hold a better card than the third, it is an even chance 
that your partner wins the trick. It is certain (bar 
trumping) that you win the second round ; therefore 
it is an even chance, if the suit is led this way, that 
you make two tricks in the first two rounds. But if 
you lead out the ace first, it is two to one against 
your making the second trick, for the adversaries 
have two hands against your partner's one, and 
either may hold the king. A third reason for lead- 
ing the lowest of your suit is, that your partner may 
prove utterly weak in it ; and in this case it is im- 
portant that you keex3 a commanding card, to stop 
the adversary from establishing it. 



/ 



WHIST. 



71 



It follows, when you lead a small card originally, 
that your partner should conclude you have led from 
numerical strength. 

There are two exceptions to the rule of originally 
leading the lowest of a strong suit. — 1. When you 
lead from ace with four or more small ones. In this 
case it is considered best to begin with the ace, lest 
it should be trumped in the second round. 2. When 
your suit contains a strong sequence, it is best to 
lead one of the sequence, in order to prevent the 
adversaries from winning the first trick with a very 
small card. 

When you intend to lead from a sequence, the 
card to be selected depends on the nature of the 
sequence, namely, whether it is a head sequence or 
an under sequence. By a head sequence is meant a 
sequence of the highest cards of your suit, i.e., of the 
cards heading your suit ; thus, such a suit as queen, 
knave, ten, six, contains a head sequence of queen, 
knave, ten. Sequences that do not head your suit 
are under sequences ; thus ace, queen, knave, ten, is 
an example of an under sequence of queen, knave, 
ten. You should — 

2. LEAD THE HIGHEST OF A HEAD SEQUENCE 

{Except as specified in the Analysis of Leads, pp. 73-77. ) 

For, otherwise, your partner is uncertain where the 
highest lies, and you and he may play two winning 
cards where one would have sufficed. For instance, 
if, with queen, knave, ten, you lead the ten, your 
partner may put the king on it, but he certainly 
would not on the queen. In addition to this, if there 



72 



WHIST. 



is any finessing to be done in the suit, it can only be 
by your partner. By finessing is meant playing an 
inferior card though holding a higher one of the suit, 
not in sequence with the card played. Thus, to con- 
tinue the illustration of the sequence of queen, knave, 
ten. You lead the queen. Your partner has the ace 
and others. He will not put it on, but will finesse 
by playing his smallest card ; and if the king lies to 
your left, that card is completely hemmed in. Had 
you led the ten, 3^our partner would have put on the 
ace, and the king have been freed. 

On the other hand, if you lead from an under 
sequence, you should lead the lowest, the reason 
being that, in this case, you wish your partner to 
put on his highest card. For example, with king, 
ten, nine, eight, you should lead the eight and not 
the ten, as if your partner's highest card is the knave, 
you wish him to put it on that he may not after- 
wards block your suit by retaining a commanding 
card of it. Or, suppose your partner^s best card is 
the queen, the lead of the ten would probably induce 
him to finesse, and thus give the adversary a chance 
of making the knave the first round, and of retaining 
the ace in hand, although you and your partner hold 
two honors in the suit. If your partner puts on the 
queen, you are still able to finesse the nine when the 
suit is returned, and this is much more advantageous 
than your partner's passing the ten. In the first 
place, the finesse is postponed to the second round, 
when, more cards having been played, you have 
more data to guide you as to the poHcy of making 
the finesse ; and, in the next place, if you have a 
choice as to whether you or your partner shall 



WHIST. 



73 



finesse in your strong suit, it is, as a rule, more 
advantageous for you to do it. For, as already ex- 
plained, it conduces to the establishment of a suit 
for the strong hand to retain the command of it, and 
for the presumably weak hand to play his highest 
cards. 

With sequences neither at the top nor bottom of a 
suit {intermediate sequences), the best card to lead is 
the smallest of the intermediate sequence. From the 
combination of king, knave, ten, nine, and one or 
more small cards, containing an intermediate se- 
quence of knave, ten, nine, it is agreed that the nine 
should be led and not the smallest of the suit ; also 
from king, knave, ten, and one or more small cards, 
the ten is the common lead. But with smaller under 
sequences, as, for example, king, ten, nine, eight, and 
a small one, say the two, the lowest card of the suit, 
the two, is frequently led, and not the lowest of the 
intermediate sequence, the eight. In the opinion of 
the writer, the eight is the best card to choose where 
the suit is led originally. (For a full explanation of 
this mode of leading, and an examination of its ad- 
vantages, see Appendix A, p. 267.) 



ANALYSIS OF LEADS IN DETAIL. 



[The following analysis should be familiarly known 
by every player, not only that he himself may follow 
it, but also that he may, with but little effort, form 



74 



WHIST. 



a correct idea of the cards the other players hold, by 
observing what they lead.] 

Ace, king, and othei^s, lead king. This is an ex- 
ception to leading the highest of a sequence. If your 
partner has none of the suit, he should not trump 
the king, for if you have not the ace, you want the 
adversary to play it, that he may not hold the win- 
ning card of your suit. If your king wins, and you 
are obliged to change the suit, your partner is pretty 
sure where the ace is ; but if you lead the ace, he can 
know nothing about the king, unless it is your prac- 
tice to lead king from ace, king, when he would be 
sure that the king is against you. An exception to 
this rule is, if you lead from an ace, king suit after 
having trumped another suit. You should then lead 
the ace first, as, if you begin with the king, and your 
partner happens to have none of the suit, he might 
trump the king, in order to lead again the suit you 
are trumping. If you hold ace, king, and queen, 
follow king with queen, and still keep up the ace : 
and act similarly if intermediate cards drop, and you 
are left with ace and the next best. With a bad 
partner all this is useless j he will not be informed 
by it, and may possibly trump your winning card. 
In trumps, with ace, king, and five small ones, lead 
in the same way, as you are sure to be left with the 
numerical command of trumps ; but with less than 
seven trumps, lead the smallest. Your ace and king 
must make ; you give your partner an even chance of 
winning the first trick, and you retain the command. 
With ace, king, queen, &c., of trumps, begin with 
the lowest of the sequence. 

Ace, king, knave, c&o., generally lead out king and 



WHIST. 



75 



ace, and if queen does not drop, continue with the 
smallest. If you lead king, and change the suit, 
your partner should understand that you hold 
the ace, knave, and are waiting to finesse on the re- 
turn of the lead. This is generally right *n trumps, 
unless there is an object in immediately getting out 
two rounds. With more than five trumps it is, as a 
rule, better to lead out king and ace, and to take 
the chance that the queen falls. It is obviously use- 
less to wait for the finesse if queen is turned up to 
your left. 

Ace, queen, knave, and one other, lead ace and 
queen. If king is against you, you still remain with 
the best. With ace, queen, knave, ten, or ace, queen, 
knave, and more than one small one, lead ace, 
then lowest of queen, knave sequence, so that if your 
partner has king he may play it the second round 
(see Section 10, p. 98). 

Ace, queen, ten, nine, lead the nine. With more 
than four, the ace in plain suits, but in trumps, the 
lowest of the ten, nine sequence. With ace, queen, 
ten, (&c., and knave turned up to your right, lead 
queen. 

Ace, knave, ten, nine, lead nine. Some players 
lead ace and knave. In trumps, the nine, unless 
queen is turned up to your left, when lead ace and 
knave. 

In oM other suits headed hy ace, lead the smallest, 
except with four or more small ones, when lead ace ; 
in trumps, the smallest (but see Appendix A, p. 267), 
unless you have seven trumps. 

King, queen, knave, ten, lead ten. The ace will 
probably not be played second hand, on the ten , and 



76 



WHIST. 



you thus get an increased chance of two rounds, and 
so of clearing your suit ; also, if your partner has the 
ace, he will play it on the ten, and leave you with 
the command. 

Xing, queen, knave, and one small one, lead king; 
continue with queen, and then, if ace does not fall, 
with the small one, on the x>resumption that partner 
has the ace. You must not presume this because 
king goes round, the ace being sometimes held up. 
With king, queen, knave, and more than one small 
one, lead knave. You are so strong that if your part- 
ner holds ace, you can afford to let him put it on, 
and so leave you with the command of your suit, 
even at the expense of winning the trick twice over. 

King, queen, and small ones, lead king ; in trumps, 
the smallest, unless you hold seven trumps, or king, 
queen, ten, c5c. If king goes round, continue with the 
smallest. Some players, with, ace, knave, &c., will 
not win the king, in order to keep the command of 
your suit. You must submit to that contingency. 
It is seldom good play. 

King, knave, and others, lead the lowest. With 
ten also, lead the ten ; with others in sequence, as 
king, knave, ten, nine, the lowest of the sequence. 
With king, knave, nine, (&c., and ten turned up to 
your right, lead knave. 

- In other numerically strong suits headed hy king, 
lead the lowest (but see Appendix A, p. 267). 

Queen, knave, ten, <&c., lead queen; and follow 
with knave, unless you have five or more of the suit, 
when follow with the lowest of the queen, knave, 
ten, sequence (compare lead from ace, queen, knave). 

Queen, knave, nine, c&c, lead the smallest, unless 



WHIST. 



77 



you have six or more of the suit, when lead queen. 
I7i trumps, if ten is turned up to your right, lead 
queen. 

Queen, knave, and two or more small ones, lead 
the lowest. You have numerical strength, and yoni 
object is not to take the chance of catching the king, 
but to establish the suit. 

In other suits of four at least, headed hy queen, 
lead the lowest (but see Appendix A, p. 267). 

Knave, ten, nine, <&c., lead knave, then ten. With 
five in suit, knave, then nine compare lead from 
queen, knave, ten). From knave, ten, eight, &c., the 
smallest, except in trumps, if nine is turned up to 
your right, when lead knave. 

In all other strong suits headed hy knave, lead the 
lowest (but see Appendix A, p. 267). 

In all suits of four cards, or more, without an 
honor, lead the lowest (but see Appendix A, p. 267), 
except with ten, nine, eight, &g., when lead ten in 
trumps, the lowest in plain suits. 

In the second round of a suit, if you have the 
winning card, generally lead it; if you have the 
second and third best, generally lead the second best, 
in other cases, generally the lowest. 



3. LEAD THE HIGHEST OP A NUMERICALLY 
WEAK SUIT. 

When it is your fate to open a numerically weak 
suit, your object should be to do as little harm as 
possible. You cannot expect to win many tricks, so 
you must do all you can to assist or strengthen your 



78 



WHIST. 



partner by leading high or strengthening cards ; for, 
by leading the highest of a suit numerically weak, 
you take the best chance of keeping the strength in 
your partner's hand, should he happen to hold it. 

It will not often happen that you are driven to 
open a weak suit originally, as one of your suits must 
contain as many as four cards. But it may so turn 
out that your four-card suit is composed of very small 
cards indeed, in which case you might prefer to open 
a suit containing better cards, though numerically 
weaker. Every one can see that ace, king, queen, is 
a better suit to open than five, four, three, two ; but, 
as you descend in one scale and ascend in the other, 
there comes a point where the two descriptions of 
strength nearly or quite balance. With hands con- 
taining only a suit of four small cards — say none 
higher than the eight or nine, and suits of three cards 
of higher value — the choice is sometimes difficult. As 
a rule, when you are in doubt, stick to the general 
principle, and lead from your four-card suit ; but if 
you have such a suit as queen, knave, and another, 
or knave, ten, and another, you will generally do less 
harm by opening that. 

There is another combination of cards with which 
you may be forced to open a numerically weak suit 
at starting, viz., when your only four-card suit is the 
trump suit. You might then open one of the other 
suits, as a smaller evil than leading a trump. No 
positive rule can be laid down for such hands as 
these. 

Whenever you decide on opening a suit of but 
three cards, choose, if possible, one in which you hold 
a sequence which may be of benefit to your partner, 



wmsT. 



79 



as queen, knave, ten ; queen, knave, and one small 
one ; knave, ten, and one other, and so on, and lead 
the highest. If you have no sequence, lead from 
your strongest weak suit. Thus, two honors not in 
sequence, and one small one, is a better lead than ace 
and two small ones, or king and two small ones. 
These, again, should be chosen in preference to queen 
and two small ones. When leading from a numeri- 
cally weak suit that contains ace, king, or queen, but 
no sequence, if you have any indication from the pre- 
vious play that your partner is strong in the suit (as 
will be explained in Section 4), lead the highest. But 
having no guide as to his strength lead the lowest. 
You run the risk of making your partner think you 
have led from numerical strength ; but, on the other 
hand, by leading out the high card, you at once give 
up the command of the suit, and, unless your part- 
ner has strength in it (the chances being against 
this), you leave yourself at the mercy of the oppo- 
nents. 

The case is different with numerically weak suits 
headed by a knave or a lower card. Of these suits you 
should lead the highest ; by retaining such a card as 
the knave you would scarcely ever be able to stop 
the adversaries from estabhshing the suit, should they 
be strong in it ; and, by leading out the high card, 
you do all you can to aid your partner, should he 
have strength. 

Ace and one other, king and one other, or queen 
and one other, are very bad suits to lead from. By 
holding them up you and your partner stand a better 
chance of making tricks on the suit ; and if it should 
be the adversaries' suit (the chances being two to on€ 



80 



WHIST. 



that it is) you keep the power of obstructing it and 
of obtaining the lead at advanced periods of the 
hand. 

It follows that when you lead a high card in the 
first round of a suit, and in the next drop a lower 
one (subject to the rules respecting leads from se- 
quences and the lead from suits of five cards), your 
partner should infer that you have led from a weak 
suit. Thus, suppose you lead a nine, which is called 
an equivocal card, as it comes from both strong and 
weak suits. If in the second round your partner can 
infer that you hold a higher card, he knows you have 
led from strength. But if in the second round you 
play the eight, your partner is equally certain that 
your first card was the highest of your weak suit. 

4. AVOID CHANGING SUITS. 

When you obtain the lead after one or more tricks 
have been played, the question arises whether or not 
you should open a fresh suit. If you have had the 
lead before, it is generally advisable to pursue your 
original lead, for you thus take the best chance of 
establishing the suit, and you open a fresh suit to a 
disadvantage. 

The fall of the cards in the previous rounds may 
cause you to alter your game. Thus, the previous 
play may have already estabhshed your suit, or may 
have so nearly established it as to justify you in 
leading trumps, as hereafter explained ; or your 
partner may have shown a very strong suit, or a 
strong trump hand, which may modify your game. 
Again, your partner may prove utterly weak in youj 



WHIST. 



81 



suit ; you would then often discontinue it, unless 
holding the winning cards or a strong sequence, be- 
cause with these exceptions, your continuing it gives 
the adversary the opportunity of finessing against 
you, and of cutting up your suit ; or you may some- 
times discontinue a suit if you suspect it will be 
trumped (as will be further explained in Sections 13- 
16) ; but, failing such indications, it is best, as a rule, 
to pursue the original lead. 

If you have not had the lead before, it is in most 
cases advisable to open your strong suit, when you pos- 
sess great strength in any suit, for you open such 
suit to advantage j but with weak or only moderately 
strong suits, which you open to a disadvantage, you 
would, as a rule, do better to return your partner's 
original lead, or to lead up to the weak suit of your 
right-hand adversary, or through the strong suit of 
your left-hand adversary. 

If your iDartner has had a lead, and you are thor- 
oughly conversant with the system of leading devel- 
oped in Sections 2 and 3, and with the Analysis of 
Leads (pp. 73-77), you know by the value of the card 
he has led whether he is strong or weak in that suit, 
unless he has led an equivocal card, which is led from 
both strong and weak suits. In this case, if you 
have no evidence from your own hand, or from the 
fall of the cards, you presume, with a good partner, 
that he has led from strength. But you mostly have 
some evidence j for instance, if he leads a ten origin- 
ally, he has led from king, queen, knave, ten ; from 
king, knave, ten ; or the highest of his suit. If you 
hold — or either adversary plays — king or knave, you 
know that vour partner has led t^ie highest of his 

6 



82 



WHIST. 



suit. But, in the absence of these cards, and es- 
pecially if the ten wins the first round, or falls to the 
ace or queen, you may conclude that your partner's 
lead was from strength, and you would do perfectly 
right to return it. 

When you have won the first trick in your part- 
ner's lead cheaply, you must be cautious in returning 
it, as the strength must be between your partner and 
your right hand adversary. For example, say A, Y, 
B, Z, are the four players, and that they sit in this 
order round the table, so that A leads and Z is last 
player. If A leads a small card of a plain suit, Y 
plays a small one, and B (third player) puts on his 
best card, the queen, which wins the trick, it is clear 
that Z can have neither ace nor king ; A cannot 
have them both, or he would have led one, therefore 
Y must have one of them at least ; and, if B returns 
the lead, he leads up to Y's strength, and may cut 
up his partner's suit. 

By observing the card led by either adversary, you 
can similarly tell whether he has led from strength 
or weakness; so also you can judge from the card 
played tliird hand by the adv^ersary whether he if. 
weak, it being presumed that the third player putr 
on his best. It is advantageous to lead up to a wea> 
suit, because you compel the second hand to put or 
a high card, or give your partner tlie opportunity o/ 
finessing. It is generally less advantageous to lead 
through a strong suit, unless you are sure that the 
second hand is not very strong, and that the fourth 
hand is weak. Otherwise, by continuing the suit, you 
may be establishing it for the adversary, and getting 
rid of the command of it from your partner's hand. 



WHIST. 



83 



In discussing leads from weak suits it was sr. im- 
posed, for the sake of convenience, that the leader 
had no indication from the play to guide him. But 
in practice, in by far the greater number of cases, 
weak suits are opened late in a hand when inference 
from previous play has given an insight into the 
strength or weakness of the several players. Thus, 
you commence with your strong suit ; your partner 
fails to show any strength in it. After several other 
tricks are played you get the lead again, remaining 
with (say) king and two others of your first lead. 
You do not wish to take one of the guards from your 
king, and you do not deem it advisable to lead a 
card which your partner may be obliged to trump. 
You therefore try another suit. By this time you 
know, either by the adversaries' leads what their 
strong suits are, or by the players' discards {i.e., by 
the cards they throw away when not able to follow 
suit,) what their weak suits are, as will be explained 
under discarding. Guided by these indications, you 
make choice of a suit for your second lead in which 
your partner is probably strong, and under such cir- 
cumstances you would, as a rule, lead the highest of 
the suit of your second choosing, if numerically weak 
in it. 

When you have led a strengthening card, and it 
wins the trick, you can rarely do better than con- 
tinue with your next highest. For examx3le : from 
queen, knave, and three you lead the queen, which 
goes round. It hardly requires to be stated that you 
make the best use of your suit by continuing with 
the knave. When your strengthening card does not 
win, the course of the play is the only guide as to 



84 



WHIST. 



whether you should continue the suit. The appHca- 
tion of the considerations advanced in this Section 
will generally inform you where the strong and weak 
suits lie, and you will act accordingly, giving your 
partner his strong suit, or, if he has not shown one, 
leading up to the weak suit of the right-hand ad- 
versary, or through the strong suit of the left-hand 
adversary. 

It has several times been assumed that it is advan- 
tageous to have the lead at advanced periods of a 
hand ; we now see one principal reason why it is so. 
The leader knows by observation where the strong 
and the weak suits lie, and he will generally be able 
to make use of this knowledge in assisting his part- 
ner, or in obstructing his opponents. 

The principles explained in the preceding pages 
refer in their integrity to the original lead, or to leads 
early in a hand. They apply also to leads generally ; 
but, at advanced periods of the hand, and towards 
its close, their application is frequently modified by 
Inferences from the previous play, and by the state 
of the score. Examples of departure from the rules 
here laid down will be presented in the illustrative 
hands. 

In the second round of a suit — 

5. RETURN THE LOWEST OF A STRONG SUIT 
THE HIGHEST OF A WEAK SUIT. 

When you return your partner's lead, the card yon 
should choose to lead the second round depends on 
the number of cards of the suit you have remaining. 
Thas, if you remain with three cards, you must have 



vVHIST. 



85 



iiad four at first. You therefore had strength in the 
suit, and you should return the smallest of the three 
remaining cards, agreeably to the principle that with 
strength it is to your advantage to reta-in the com- 
mand in your own hand. If you remain with two 
cards only, you should return the best, to strengthen 
your partner ; and, similarly, if you have discarded 
one of a four-suit, and are left with two only at tlte 
time you return it, you have destroyed the numerical 
power of your suit, and should therefore treat it as a 
weak suit, and return the highest. 

The advantages of this principle are numerous. In 
the case that you and your partner are both numeri- 
cally strong, the return of the lowest prevents him 
from finessing in a suit which must be trumped third 
round. Further, if your hand is weak, you naturally 
return a suit in which you infer that your partner is 
strong. You then return a strengthening card to get 
a high card of your partner's strong suit out of his 
way, and you enable him to finesse if he thinks 
proper, and so to keep the command of his suit in his 
ov/n hand. 

It is true that with two small cards only (say the 
five and the six) you do not strengthen your partner 
by returning the six. But there is a collateral ad- 
vantage in keeping to the rule even with small cards 
— you enaUe a good partner to calculate how raany 
you have left of the suit, and often where the remain- 
der of it lies. Thus, your partner leads a small card 
of a suit of which you have king, three, and two. You, 
as third player X3ut on the king. If you return the 
suit, you return the three, and not the two, when it 
ought to be inferred, either that you have returned 



86 



WHIST. 



the smallest of a suit of four or more, or that you 
have no more of the suit left, or the two only. When 
your two comes down in the third round it ought to 
be certain that you have no more. If your partner 
has confidence is you, he can often calculate what 
you have left before the third round is played ; thus, 
in the above instance, your partner, not having the 
two himself, and seeing that it does not drop from 
the adversaries, concludes, with tolerable certainty, 
that you remain, after the second round, with the 
two and no more. 

There are two exceptions to the rule of play above 
stated: 1. When you hold the winning card you 
return it, whatever number of cards you hold, lest it 
should be trumped the third round, or, your partner, 
imagining it to be against him, should finesse ; and 
2. When you hold the second and third best, in plain 
suits, you return the highest. Thus, suppose you 
have queen, knave, ten, and one small one of a suit 
of which your partner leads a small one, you (third 
hand) put on the ten, which is won by (say) the ace. 
If you afterwards return the suit, you should return 
the queen, for you not only force out the king, if 
against you, but you also do not block your partner's 
suit, should he have led from great numerical 
strength, say five cards to the nine, an advantage 
which you lose by returning the small one. 

It should also be observed that, occasionally, when 
you return your adversary's strong lead, you do not 
lead your highest of two remaining cards, especially, 
if you hold the second best guarded. For example, 
you are A, Y is your left-hand adversary. Y has led 
a king, which was won by the ace, leaving Y with 



WHIST. 



87 



the queen and others. You remain with knave and 
one small one. If you are driven to return this suit, 
you should return the small one. The queen will 
probably be put on second hand, and vou will remain 
with the best. 



88 



WHIST. 



THE SECOND HAND. 



In the first round of a suit, you should generah^, 

6. PLAY YOUR LOWEST CARD SECOND HAITO. 

You presume that the • first hand has led from 
strength, and, if you have a high card in his suit, 
you He over him when it is led again ; whereas, if 
you play your high card second hand, you get rid of 
a commanding card of the adversary's suit, and when 
it is returned, the original leader finesses against you. 
Besides this, the third player will put on his highest 
card, and, if it is better than yours, you have wasted 
power to no purpose. 

If, however, you have a sequence of high cards, 
you should put on one of the sequence second hand, 
for, if you pass the trick altogether, the third hand 
may win with a very low card, or, with his low card, 
may force a high one from your partner. The chief 
objection to playing an unsuxjported high card does 
not apply, as the leader cannot successfully finesse 
against you in the next round. 

With a moderate sequence, such as queen, knave 
— knave, ten — ten, nine — you cover if you are nu- 
merically weak ; but, Avith more than three cards of 
the suit, you pass a small card led, agreeably to the 



WHIST. 



89 



principle already discussed — that in weak suits you 
play to strengthen your partner, but in strong ones 
you leave him to help you. For instance : the leader 
(A) has king, ten, nine, eight, seven of a suit ; the 
second player (Y) has queen, knave, and one small 
one; the fourth player (Z) has ace and two small 
ones. A leads the small card ; Y should cover with 
the knave ; if he does not, the card led forces Z's ace. 
It is true that this happens also if Y passes with 
queen, knave, and two small ones ; but Y, in this 
case, has a guard to his queen and knave, and is left 
with the two best cards after the second round of the 
suit. 

With a sequence lower than ten, nine, the advan- 
tage of covering is very small, and there is some fear 
of its being taken to indicate a desire for a trump lead 
— as will be explained in Section 13. 

7. PLAY THE LOWEST OP A SEQUENCE. 

When you do not head a trick, you throw away 
your lowest card to economize your strength. Thus, 
with queen and two small ones, you would not 
throw the queen to king led. It is an error to sup- 
pose that it is of no consequence which card you play 
when you hold only small cards or cards in sequence. 
It is not of much consequence as regards merely the 
chance of making tricks ; but it is of great impor- 
tance in affording information to partner. 

Thus suppose the players to be as before, A, Y, B, 
Z. A leads the three of a suit, Y plays the five, B the 
four. It ought to be certain that B has no more of 
the suit, it being presumed that he, not being able to 



90 



WHIST. 



head the trick, throws away his smallest. If he after- 
wards plays the two, and it turns out that he pre- 
viously played the four through carelessness, his 
partner loses confidence, and gives up all hopes of 
drawing correct inferences from his play. 

The principle applies equally to cards in sequence. 
Thus, say knave is led, and you (second hand) hold 
ace and king ; if you put on the king, your partner 
gains the very important information that you have 
the ace also. For knave is not led from ace, knave, 
&c. {see Analysis of Leads, p. 74), so the leader 
cannot have the ace ; the third hand cannot have it, 
or he would win the king 3 and the fourth, not having 
it himself, infers that you have it. If you put on the 
ace, not only could he not tell that you have the 
king, but would presume that it lay with the 
adversary. The principle, though stated for the 
sake of convenience in respect of the second hand, 
applies to the third and fourth hands also. (For a 
fuller examination of this point see Section 12.) 



ANALYSIS OF PLAY OF SECOJ^D HAM) 
IN DETAIL. 

{See Note on Analysis of Leads, p, 73.) 



Ace, Mng, cfec, put on king; in trumps it is often 
right to leave the chance of the first trick to partner. 
With queen also, you are so strong that you should 
not pass the trick even in trumps. 



wmsT. 



91 



Ace, kinQi knave, play king. If the second round 
comes from the original leader, you will then know 
whether his lead was from strength or weakness, and 
will finesse or not accordingly. 

Ace, queen, knave, play knave ; with ten 'also, or 
others belonging to the sequence, the lowest of it. If, 
in trumps, king is turned up to your left, of course 
ace should be put on ; obvious alterations on account 
of the trump card will not be mentioned in future. 

Ace, queen, ten, put on queen, as you thus make 
certain of two tricks, unless you are led through 
twice, and both king and knave lie over you. In 
trumps, the ten. With ace, queen, and small ones, 
the smallest, unless knave is led by a good player, 
when put on ace ; it is useless to cover knave with 
queen, as the leader cannot have king {see Analysis 
of Leads). This requires modification towards the 
close of a hand, for then the leader might have the 
king. With ace, queen, and three or more small ones, 
put on queen if weak in trumps, a small one if strong. 

Ace, knave, ten, and one or more small ones, play 
the smallest ; in trumps, the ten. For from king, 
queen, &c., in trumps, a small one is generally led ; 
but, in plain suits, the king is led. If, then, in a 
plain suit, a small one is led, either king or queen 
must be in the third or fourth hand, and no good is 
got by covering. With ace, knave, and one or more 
small ones, it is useless to put on the knave, second 
hand, in any suit. 

With ace and four small ones generally pass the 
first trick, unless the game is in a critical state, and 
you are weak in trumps ; if you suspect a single card 
lead, it is often rig;ht to put on ace. 



92 



WHIST. 



King, queen, and others, play queen. In trwnps, 
the smallest, unless you have ten also, or only tlin t 
in suit. 

King, knave, ten, <&c., the lowest of the knave 
sequence. 

y^ith queen, knave, &c. — knave, ten, (&c. — ten,7iine, 
&c, — play as directed at pp. 88, 89. 

// a small card is led, and you hold an honor and 
one small card, pass the trick, as a rule ; for, by put- 
ting on the honor, you expose your weakness, and 
enable the original leader to finesse in the second 
round. The principal exception is when the circum- 
stances of a hand cause you to seize any chance of 
getting the lead — as, when you want to stop a lead 
of trumps, or v/ant to lead trumps yourself — when it 
is often right, with ace, or king, or queen, and one 
small card, to put on the honor second hand. In 
trumps, if king or queen is turned up, and it is only 
singly guarded {i.e., if you have only one trump), it 
is generally best to put on the turn-up second hand. 
If you hold king or queen singly guarded, and a 
superior honor is turned up to your right, you gain 
an advantage by putting on your king or queen ] if 
the superior honor is turned up to your left, the 
reverse. 5Vith queen and another, your partner 
having turned up ace or king, put on the small one 
second hand. 

If a ten is led, and you hold queen and one other, 
cover with the queen. With queen and two others, 
pass the ten. If a ten is led, and you hold knave 
and one or more small ones, you should play a small 
one. 

If an honor is led. and you have a higher honor 



WHIST. 



93 



and numerical weakness, cover it. With one honor 
and numerical strength you pass an honor led, except 
you have the ace, when put it on. Some i3layers pass 
queen led if they hold ace, ten, &c., or king, ten, &c. ; 
but, in the opinion of the writer, it is better to cover. 
Vv'hen you have a fourcliette, cover of course ; thus, 
if knave is led, and you have queen, ten, &c., put on 
the queen. 

In the second round of a suit, if you have the win- 
ning card, you should — in plain suits — generally put 
it on second hand ; but in trumps there are many 
cases in which you should not, especially if you have 
numerical strength in trumps and a good hand besides. 
Your winning trump must make, and, by passing the 
second round, you, perhaps enable your partner to 
make a third best trump — or even a smaller one — 
yourself retaining the command. 

If, when led through in the second round of a suit, 
you conjecture from previous play that the second 
test card^ is to your right, it is sometimes advisable 
to put on the third best. You thus save your part- 
ner's hand if he holds the best. For instance : if 
knave is led in the first round, and your partner 
(then second player) puts on king, which wins the 
trick, it is clear (if the ten is your best) that your 
partner has the ace, for the third player could not 
win the king, and the leader could not have led from 
knave, ace. If your right-hand adversary afterwards 
returns the suit through you, you should put on the 
ten, in order to save your partner's ace. 



94 



WHIST. 



THE THIRD HAND. 



In the first round of a suit, you should generally 

a PLAY TOUR HIGHEST CARD THIRD HAND, 

In order to strengthen your partner. You presume 
that he leads from his strong suit, and wants to get 
the winning cards of it out of his way ; you, therefore, 
do not finesse, but play your highest, remembering 
that you play the lowest of a sequence (7). 

With ace, queen (and, of course, ace, queen, knave, 
&c., in sequence) you do finesse, for, in this case, the 
finesse cannot be left to your partner. In trumps 
you may finesse ace, knave, if an honor is turned up 
to your right. Some players finesse knave with king, 
knave, &c. ; but it is contrary to principle to finesse 
in your partner's strong suit. 

If your partner leads a strengthening card, the case 
is different. If it is an equivocal card, and you have 
no indication as to its being from strength or weak- 
ness, you presume it is from strength, and do not 
finesse. But, if it is probable that your partner has 
led from a weak suit, then you may finesse king, 
knave, &c., or pass his card altogether, so as not to 
give up the entire command of the suit. 

For instance : you would not put ace on your part- 
ner's queen, for you thus part with ace and queen 



"WHIST. 



95 



for one trick, and leave the winning card against 
you; also, with ace, knave, &c., if ten is led origin- 
ally, you would X3ass it : and so on. If ten is led, and 
your only honor is the ace, put it on. The lead is 
most probably from king, knave, ten, &c., and you 
should leave the finesse to your partner. If ten is 
led, and your only honor is the queen, pass it. If the 
lead is from king, knave, ten, you gain nothing by 
putting on the queen ; and, if the ten is a strengthen- 
ing card, you give up the entire command of the suit 
by covering. If you have considerable strength in a 
suit, in which a strengthening card is led lo you, you 
must be guided as to the finesse by your strength in 
trumps ; thus, if your iDartner leads knave of a suit 
in which you hold ace, king, and small ones — if you 
have an average hand and four trumps you may 
pass the knave, but with only three trumps you 
should not. 

In the second round of a suit, if you (third player) 
hold the best and third-best cards, and you have no 
indication as to the position of the intermediate card, 
you should generally finesse if strong in trumps, but 
not if weak. If you hold second and fourth best, you 
may nearly always finesse ; for you conclude that the 
winning card is over you in the fourth hand, since 
your partner has not led it, and the second player 
has not put it on. If the third best lies over you 
also, you cannot prevent the tenace from making, 
and your only chance therefore is to finesse. Thus, 
if you lead a small card from queen, ten, and two 
small ones, your partner wins the first trick with the 
king, and returns a small one. The ace is certainly 
to your left, you therefore finesse the ten, for if your 



96 



WHIST. 



left-hand adversary holds ace and knave he must 
make them both ; but, otherwise, your ten forces the 
ace, and you are left with the best. In trumps the 
winning card is often held up by the adversary, but 
you must submit to this contingency, and generally 
finesse. 

It is of no use to finesse against your right-hand 
adversary in a suit in which he has shown weakness. 
For instance, if the second hand has none of the suit 
led, and does not trump it, you (third hand) should 
not finesse a major ten ace (i.e., the best and third 
best cards). This often occurs in the second or third 
round of a suit ; also, if your partner (third player) 
has won a trick very cheaply, and the suit is returned, 
it is rarely of any use to finesse if you have the win- 
ning card. 

In some few positions, however, it is necessary to 
finesse, even if the second player holds nothing. 
Thus, your partner leads a knave, and the second 
hand renounces (^.e., does not follow suit); if you 
(third player) hold king, it is useless to cover, as ace, 
queen in the fourth hand must make. Again, you 
have king and two small trumps ; your partner leads 
a small one ; the second hand renounces. If you 
want one trick to win or save the game, you (third 
player) play a small trump, when the fourth player 
will be obliged to lead up to your king guarded. 

The state of the game and of the score will often 
direct as to a finesse late in a hand. Thus, if you 
hold a winning card, and want one trick to save or 
\Yin the game, of course you should not run any risk. 
A finesse against even one card is generally wrong, 
if, by playing otherwise, you prevent the adversary 



WHIST. 



97 



from scoring three or five. A finesse is almost always 
bad, if, by not finessing, you insure the odd trick, as 
that makes a difference of two to the score. In the 
opposite case, of course, a finesse is generally right 
(sometimes even against more than one card), if its 
success gives you the odd trick, or puts you at the 
score of three or five. 

The considerations as to finessing and the course 
of play generally, that come in as the hand proceeds, 
are so complicated, and depend so much on infer- 
ences from previous play, and on the state of the 
score, that one can scarcely do more than to state a 
few broad rules, and to add some examples. Exem- 
plifications of the conduct of the hand at advanced 
periods will be found in Sections 17 and 18 (pp. 122- 
143), and more in the illustrative hands. 

7 



98 



WHIST. 



THE FOURTH HAND 



The fourth player having, with a few exceptions, 
merely to win the trick, if against him, his play 
involves no further development of general prin- 
ciples. • 

The exceptional cases, where the fourth hand 
should not win the trick though he can, or should 
win his partner's trick in order to get the lead, 
depend so much on the previous fall of the cards, 
that they can best be illustrated in the hands. 



THE COIMAND OE SUITS. 



In the foregoing chax)ters it has often been inci- 
dentally stated that you should 

9. KEEP THE COMMAND OP YOUR ADVER- 

SARY'S SUIT: and 

10. GET RID OP THE COMMAND OP YOUR 

PARTNER S SUIT 

The reasons will be obvious to those who are 
familiar with the principles in the previous pages ; in 
the first case, you obstruct the adversaries' suits, and 
prevent their establishing them j in the second case, 
you assist in clearing the suit for your partner. 



WHIST. 



99 



Thus, with ace and queen only of a suit led by your 
partner, if you win with the queen, play out the ace at 
once ; but, if the suit is led by your adversary, keep 
the ace in your hand. If you play out the winning 
card of the opponent's suit in hopes of trumping 
the next round, which is often done by those who 
play a trumping game, you do just what the adver- 
saries want ; for the lead of the ace gives them valu- 
able assistance towards bringing in their suit when 
trumps are out. 

In order to get rid, at the proper moment, of the 
command of suits in which your partner has strength, 
you need to pay exact attention to the cards pre- 
viously played, and often to argue ingeniously from 
them. For example : — 1. From ace, queen, and two 
small cards, you lead the smallest ; the second hand 
renounces ; your partner lolays the nine ; the fourth 
hand wins with the king, which shows that he has 
neither ten nor knave. If the fourth hand returns 
the suit, you (then second player) should play the 
queen, and not the small one, for your partner must 
have, at least, ten and knave, and, if he originally 
had five of the suit, you get out of his way. 2. Your 
hand contains four cards, viz., ace and one small 
spade (spades not having been led), and two losing 
diamonds ; your partner has nothing but spades, of 
which he leads the king. If you pass it you cannot 
make more than two tricks, for the winning diamonds 
are against you in one hand ; but, if you win your 
partner's king, and return the small one, and your 
partner has led from king, queen, you still win two 
tricks, and get a chance of making three or four. 

You help your partner to get rid of the command 



100 



WHIST. 



of your suit by leading the lowest of a sequence, not- 
withstanding that it heads your suit, when you want 
him to win your card if he can. For this reason you 
lead ten from king, queen, knave, ten. Again, sup- 
pose you are left with knave, ten, and others of a 
suit, of which your partner can only have king and 
another (ace and queen being out), though it is 
uncertain whether he does hold the king. You would 
cause him to get rid of the king by leading the ten ; 
whereas, if you led the knave, he probably would 
not part with the king. 

Experienced players frequently endeavor to steal a 
trick, or to obtain the entire command of a suit 
to keep a sufficient number of winning or command- 
ing cards in it to make every trick), by underplaying. 
Underplay is keeping up the winning card, generally 
in the second round of a suit, by leading a low card, 
though holding the best. 

Thus, suppose a small trump is led, and you (fourth 
player) hold ace, knave, and two small ones, and 
you win with one of the small ones. If you return a 
small trump, you will very likely cause your left- 
hand adversary to believe that your partner has the 
ace ; consequently, if your left-hand adversary has 
the king, he may not put it on ; your partner will 
win the second round with the queen, and you will 
retain the command of the trump suit. 

Underplay is an extempore stratagem depending 
on observation of the previous fall of the cards, and, 
therefore, best capable of explanation by examples. 
Here is a somewhat complicated one : A, finding his 
partner strong in trumps, leads the seven. The king 
is put on by Y (second hand), which B (third hand) 



WHIST. 



101 



wins, holding ace, queen, ten, nine, eight. It is evi- 
dent to B that A's seven was his highest trump, as 
the only higher one in is the knave, and A would 
never lead the seven from knave, seven. The king 
having been put on second hand, B concludes 
that Y, in all probabihty, holds at most one small 
trump more. The knave is, to a moral certainty, in 
Z's hand. B, by leading the eight in the second 
round, will probably win the trick, and unless Z had 
four trumps originally, will catch the knave with the 
queen in the third round. (Further examples of un- 
derplay occur in the Hands.) 

Players should be on their guard against this 
manoeuvre, particularly when second hand in the 
second round of a suit they hold the second best card 
guarded, and the adversary has been playing a strong 
game (as by leading trumps), and is left with the long 
trump, or is certain to be able to obtain the lead again. 
Then it is often right for the second hand to stick on 
a singly-guarded second best card, especially if that 
is the only chance of making it. Thus, in the case 
stated in the previous paragraph, Z's only chance of 
making the knave, if singly guarded, is to put it on 
second hand. For, if the queen with small ones is in 
A's hand, A is sure to finesse on the return of the suit 
by his partner. Again, take this case : A leads the 
six of diamonds j Y, with knave, ten, and a small 
one, puts on the ten ; B plays the king, and Z wins 
it with the ace. Presently, A obtains the lead again, 
and leads the eight of diamonds. A, having led the 
lowest of his suit in the first round, may be inferred 
to have led from a strong suit — headed in this case by 
the queen — and is underplaying with, probably, queen 



102 



WHIST. 



and nine in his hand. Y should observe this, and in 
the second round should win the eight with the 
knave. 

Refusing to play the winning card in the first and 
second rounds of a suit — commonly called holding up 
— is, in fact, a species of underplay. For example : — 
1. Trumps are led by the player to your left; the 
third player wins with the ace, and returns the suit 
through your hand. If you are left with king and 
one or more small ones, you should play a small one, 
unless the circumstances of the hand are such that 
you deem it advantageous to stop the trump lead. 
The original trump leader, not knowing but that the 
king is in your partner's hand, will probably finesse, 
and 3^our partner thus has a chance of making the 
third best trump, even though unguarded. If your 
partner has neither second nor third best trump, no 
harm is done, as you will then probably make but 
one trick in the suit, however you play. 2. Again, 
ten tricks are played, and each player is left with 
three cards of a suit not opened. If the second player 
puts on the queen (from which it may be inferred that 
he holds the king also), the third hand should not 
cover with the ace. For, by winning the trick, he 
must lead up to king guarded ; but, by passing it, 
he leaves the lead with the second player, and takes 
the best chance of making two tricks. 3. One more 
example will suffice : A has the last trump, and ace 
and four small cards of a suit not led. The adversary 
now leads the king, and follows with the queen of 
that suit. A should pass them both ; by so doing he 
will probably make three tricks in the suit if the cards 
are equally divided. 



WHIST. 



103 



DISCARDING. 



When you cannot follow suit, you should 
11. DISCARD FROM YOUR Wi3AKEST SUIT. 

You weaken a suit by discarding from it, and lessen 
the number of long cards you might otherwise estab- 
hsh and bring in (i.e., make tricks with if trumps are 
out, and you obtain the lead after the establishment 
of your suit). On the other hand, you do but little 
harm by throwing from a suit in which you are already 
weak. Your partner should understand that your 
first or original discard is from your weakest suit, 
just as he understands that your original lead is from 
your strongest suit. 

But, just as in the case of leads, you are sometimes 
obhged to lead from a weak suit, or to make a forced 
lead, so sometimes you have to msike sl forced discard. 
Forced discards require much more careful consider- 
ation than they generally receive. 

It is clear that if the opponents declare great strength 
in trumps (by leading trumps or asking for them, as 
will be fully explained in Section 13), that your chance 
of bringing in a suit is practically nil. You should 
therefore, in such cases, abandon the tactics you 
would otherwise adopt, and play to guard your weaker 
suits, by discarding from your best protected suit. 



104 



WHIST. 



which is generally your longest suit. You must, in 
fact, play a defensive game. 

If this system of discarding is comprehended by the 
two players who are partners, it follows, as a matter 
of course, that when timmps are not declared against 
you, your partner will assume you are weak in the 
suit you first discard ; but, when trumps are declared 
against you, he will give you credit for strength in 
the suit from which you originally throw away. 
This is most important, as it affects his subsequent 
leads. In the first case, he will refrain from leading 
the suit from which you have discarded ; in the second, 
he will, unless he has a very strong suit of his own, 
select for his lead the suit in which you have shown 
strength by your discard. 

It must be borne in mind that it is only your 
original discard which is directive. Having once 
discarded, you cannot undo your work by any number 
of discards from another suit. 

It is dangerous to unguard an honor, or to blank 
an ace ; and, also, to discard a single card when the 
game is in an undeveloped stage, as it exposes your 
weakness almost as soon as the suit is led. But, 
when you see that there is a probability of strength 
in trumps on your side, direct your partner to your 
strong suit by all the means in your power, and un- 
hesitatingly unguard an honor, or throw a single card. 
Of course, if strength in trumps is against you, these 
are the very last cards you should think of throwing 
away. 

When your left-hand adversary will have the lead 
next round, if you discard from a suit in which you 
hold a tenace, you may possibly induce him to lead 



WHIST. 



105 



that suit up to you. You must be on your guard 
against this ruse, and not necessarily lead up to the 
discard of your right-hand opponent. 

The same principle applies to trumping as to dis- 
carding. The weaker you are in trumps the better 
it is for you to make a httle one by trumping, as will 
be further explained in Section 14. 



THE CONVEKSATION OF THE GAIE. 



12 AFFORD INFORMATION BY YOUR PLAY. 

It has several times been assumed in the preceding 
pages that you should convey information by your 
play. The question naturally arises, How is it that 
a player gains any advantage hy publishing infor- 
mation to the table f It is often argued, and with much 
show of reason, that as almost every revelation con- 
cerniDg your hand must be given to the whole table, 
and that as you have two adversaries and only one 
partner, you publish information at a disadvantage. 
No doubt this argument would have considerable 
force if you were compelled to expose the whole of 
your hand. But you possess the power, to a great 
extent, of selecting what facts shall be announced 
and what concealed. 

Experienced players are unanimous in admitting 



106 



WHIST. 



that it is an advantage to inform your partner of 
strength in your own suits, though some advise con- 
cealment of strength in suits in which the adversaries 
have shown strength. Thus, with ace, king, second 
hand, the usual play is to put on the king. The third 
hand does not win the king, and hence the leader is 
able to infer that the ace of his strong suit is against 
him. But, if you put on the ace second hand, you 
prevent the leader from discovering where the king 
of his suit lies. It is, however, found that two honors 
in the adversary's suit constitute sufficient strength 
to make it advantageous in the long run to proclaim 
your force ; while, with less strength, it is not easy 
to mystify the opponents prejudicially ; so that, on 
the whole, it seldom happens that a balance of gain 
results from the adoption of deceptive play. 

It is in most cases unquestionably disadvantageous 
to you that the whole table should be aware of your 
being very weak in a particular suit, and conse- 
quently, information of weakness should be withheld 
as long as possible. If you are led up to fourth hand 
in such a suit, or if your partner opens the suit with 
a small card, of course the disclosure is inevitable ; 
but until one of these events happens your poverty 
can generally be kept out of sight. It may happen 
that you are occasionally forced to lead a weak suit 
yourself ; and in this event the least disadvantage is 
to tell the truth at once, by first leading the highest 
of it. Your partner apprised of the state of your 
hand by the fall of your smaller card in the subse- 
quent round will probably deem it prudent to strive 
by defensive tactics to avert total defeat in that suit, 
rather than to contend single-handed against the 



WHIST. 



107 



combined strength of the opponents. Indeed, at 
critical points of the game, when you have exhibited 
weakn«ls in one or more suits, your partner would 
frequently be justified in' playing a false card. He is 
driven to rely solely on himself, and he is entitled to 
adopt every artifice his ingenuity can suggest in order 
to perplex the other side. The consideration that he 
may mislead you will no longer influence him if he 
knows you to be powerless for good or for evil. 

You inform your partner by following the recog- 
nized practice of the game, as by leading from your 
strong suit originally, by leading the highest of a 
sequence, by following suit with the lowest of a se- 
quence and so forth. If you adhere to this you will 
soon acquire a reputation for playing a straightfor- 
ward intelhgible game j and this character alone 
will counterbalance the disadvantage which will 
sometimes attach to the fact that you have enabled 
the adversaries to read your hand. If your partner 
knows that you play at random and without method, 
he will be in a state of constant uncertainty ; and 
you almost preclude him from executing any of the 
finer strokes of play, the opportunities for which gen- 
erally arise from being able to infer with confidence 
the position of particular cards. The extreme case 
of two skilled players against two unskilled ones 
amounts almost to this, that towards the close of a 
hand the former have the same advantage as though 
they had seen each other's cards, while the latter 
have not. 

It follows that when you are unfortunately tied to 
an untaught partner, especially if at the same time 
you are pitted against observant adversaries, you 



108 



wmsT. 



should expose your hand as little as possible, par- 
ticularly in respect of minor details. 

It will become apparent, on considerati«ft, that 
the question of the advisability of affording informa- 
tion is more or less intimately connected with every 
card that is played. It is, therefore, of extreme im- 
portance to ascertain whether the practice is advan- 
tageous or the reverse. The arguments just adduced 
are doubtless in favor of the practice of affording 
information by the play ; but it must be admitted 
that by far the strongest authority for it is that ex- 
perienced players, by their settled opinions, reject the 
opposite course. 

The instructed player frequently selects one card in 
preference to another iwith the sole object of afford- 
ing information. When the principle is carried thus 
far, the play becomes purely conventional. For ex- 
ample : you naturally win a trick as cheap as pos- 
sible ; if, fourth hand, you could win with a ten you 
would not waste an ace. But suppose you held 
knave and ten, which card should then be played ? 
The knave and ten in one hand are of equal value* 
and therefore to win the knave would be no un- 
necessary sacrifice of strength. Nevertheless, you 
extend to such cases the rule of winning as cheaply 
as possible, and you play the ten for the mere pur- 
pose of conveying information. This is a simple 
instance of a pure convention. Though a conven- 
tion, it is in accordance with, and is suggested by. 
principle. Indeed, ail the estabhshed conventions of 
the game are so chosen as to harmonize with play 
that would naturally be adopted independently of 
convention. The aggregation of the recognized rules 



WHIST. 



109 



of play, including the established conventions, con- 
stitute what in practice is called the Conversation o^^ 
the Game of Whist. 

It must not be overlooked that unsound players 
often deceive unintentionally, and all players some- 
times with intention. It is, therefore, necessary to 
be on your guard against drawing inferences too 
rigidly. 

There are some ways of conveying information 
which have not been explained. One is to keep the 
turn-up card in hand as long as possible ; thus, hav- 
ing turned up the five and holding the six, trump 
with the six in preference. An exception to this rule 
is when you are weak in trumps, and the adversaries 
have shown strength in them, because then, if the 
adversaries know you have the turn-up card in your 
hand, they will draw it, whereas, if you play it, they 
may be uncertain as to your holding another. By 
leading the lowest of a head sequence of winning 
trumps you convey information ; thus, with ace, 
king, queen, knave, lead knave and queen, and, 
when they win, your partner will see that you have 
four by honors ; but did you lead out king and 
queen, as in plain suits, he could tell nothing about 
the knave. So also, if all the honors are out, and you 
lead, e.g,, from ten, nine, lead the nine. You may 
pursue the same method in plain suits when your 
partner has no more trumps, and with any head se- 
quence when you want him to win it, or are sure he 
cannot, and also when the fourth hand has already 
renounced in the suit led. For instance, you have 
queen, knave, ten, and a small trump, and your 
partner turns up the nine ; you lead the small one, 



110 



WHTST. 



and your partner's nine forces the king. It is now 
clear that your partner has not the ace^ as he would 
never finesse ace, nine. If you next lead the ten, and 
it forces the ace from the second hand, your partner 
is informed that you hold queen and knave, which 
he could not have told if you had continued with the 
queen. 

If you have the complete command of a suit, you 
can publish the fact by discarding the highest of it ; 
the presumption being that you would never throw 
away a winning card with a losing one in your hand. 
If you discard a second-best card, you ought to have 
no more of the suit, for with the best also you would 
discard that, and with a smaller one you would dis- 
card that. By winning with the highest, and return- 
ing the lowest of a sequence (more especially fourth 
hand), you show that you have the intermediate 
cards. Thus, with ace, king, queen, fourth hand, if 
you desire to continue the suit, you would win with 
the ace and return the queen. 



TRUMPS. 



THE MANAGEMENT OF TRUMPS 

The Management of Trumps is, perhaps, the most 
difficult — certainly the most important — of all points 
at Whist. Before discussing the special uses of 
trumps, it may be observed that in some few hands 
trumps are led like plain suits, because they areyouT 



WHIST. 



Ill 



strongest suit, and you prefer leading them to open- 
ing a weak suit. The principles aheady discussed, 
which guide us to the most favorable chances for 
making tricks in a suit, apply to trumps equally Avith 
other suits. The privilege, however, enjoyed by the 
trump suit of winning every other, causes some mod- 
ifications of detail (noticed at pp. 73-77, and at pp. 
90-93); for, since the winning trumps must make 
tricks, you play a more backward game in the trump 
suit. Thus, with ace, king, and small trumps, you 
lead a small one, by which you obtain an increased 
chance of making tricks in the suit, and you keep 
the command of it, and must have the lead after the 
third round, the advantage of which will be presently 
explained. Even if your partner is so weak in trumps 
that the opponent wins the first trick very cheaply, 
but little (if any) harm accrues ; for the opponent 
then has to open a suit up to you or your partner. 

In the great majority of hands, trumps are applied 
to their special uses, viz. : 1. To disarm the oppo- 
nents, and to prevent their trumping your winning 
cards; and 2. To trump the winning cards of the 
adversaries. In order to comprehend when trumps 
may be most profitably applied to the first, and when 
to the second, of these uses, we must first clearly per- 
ceive the objects aimed at throughout the hand, 
viz. : to estabhsh a suit, to exhaust the adversaries' 
trumps, and to retain the long trump, or a certain 
winning card with which to get the lead again, for 
the purpose of bringing in the suit ; also to endeavor 
to obstruct similar designs of the opponents. It fol- 
lows that you should 



112 



wmsT. 



13. LEAD TRUMPS WHEN VERY STRONG IN 
THEM. 

It cannot be too strongly impressed that the pri- 
mary use of strength in trumps is to draw the adver- 
saries' trumps for the bringing in of your own or 
your partner's long suit. With great strength in 
trumps (five or more), you may proceed at once to 
disarm the opponents, and lead trumps without wait- 
ing to establish a suit. For, witli five trumps or 
more, the chance of your succeeding in drawing the 
other trumps, and of being left with the long trumps 
is so considerable, that you may then almost always 
lead trumps, whatever your other cards. 

This point is much misunderstood even by pretty 
good players. It is often said, " Strength in trumps 
is no reason for leading them, unless you have a good 
suit as well.'* If both you and your partner are de- 
void of good cards you cannot make tricks j but 
should your partner hold one good suit out of the 
three, you will very hkely bring it in for him by lead- 
ing from strength in trumps. For, even if you have 
a poor hand out of trumps, you will discover in the 
course of play (i.e., by the suits led or discarded by 
the other players) what your partner's suit is, and 
will be able to lead it to him each time you get the 
lead with your long trumps. Besides, if your hand 
is weak out of trumps, you are placed in the disad- 
vantageous position of leading from a weak suit un- 
less you lead trumps. 

You should not be deterred from leading, trumps 
because an honor is turned up to your right, nor 



WHIST. 



113 



necessarily lead them because the same happens to 
your left ; either is proper if the circumstances of the 
hand require it,- but neither otherwise. To illustrate 
this proposition, take this hand : ace, queen, and 
three small spades (trumps), three small hearts, three 
small clubs, and two small diamonds. The king of 
spades is turned up fourth hand. The best lead is 
disputed ; but the author has no hesitation in advis- 
ing the lead of the smallest trump, notwithstanding 
that there is a certain finesse over the king. A httle 
consideration will render this apparent. By leading 
the trump suit originally, you obtain the advantages 
just enumerated, and make the dealer open a suit up 
to your partner. Your partner, as soon as he gets 
the lead, will return the trump, and you thus obtain 
the command of trumps whether the king was forced 
out in the first round or not. 

Bearing in mind the severe consequences of leaving 
the adversary with the long trump, you must be 
cautious in leading trumps from less than five ; four 
trumps and a moderate hand not justifying an origi- 
nal trump lead. You should, instead, lead your 
strong plain suit, and if you establish it, and the 
adversaries do not meantime show any great strength, 
as by leading or calling for trumps (pp. 116, 117), you 
may then, with four trumps, mostly venture a trump 
lead. With strength in trumps you may generally 
finesse more freely in the second and third rounds of 
trumps than you would in plain suits. In plain suits 
an unsuccessful finesse may result in the best being 
afterwards trumped, which cannot happen in trumps. 
Moreover, by finessing, you keep the winning trump, 
and so obtain the lead after the third round. This 

8 



114 



WHIST. 



is especially important when you have a suit estab- 
lished and but four trumps. Here you should, gen- 
erally, not merely finesse in the second round, but 
hold up the winning trump, and sometimes at this 
juncture refuse to part with it even if the trump lead 
comes from the adversaiy. 

An example will render this more clear. The 
leader (A) has ace, and three small trumps, a strong 
suit, headed by ace, king, queen, and a probable 
trick, say king and another, in a third suit. A 
should, in the writer's judgment, lead a trump. II 
B (A's partner) wins the first trick in trumps, and 
returns it. A, as a rule, should not part with his ace. 
"When A or B obtain the lead again they play a third 
round of trumps, which, being won by the ace. 
enables A, by leading his tierce major, to get a force 
ix,, to compel one of his adversaries to trump in 
order to win the trick), in which case nothing short 
of five trumps in one hand against him can prevent 
A's bringing in liis suit. You must be prepared for 
similar tactics on the part of the adversaries, and not 
conclude that they have not the best trump because 
they suffer you to win the first or second round. 

With a well protected hand containing four trumps, 
two being honors, a trump may be led originally. 
For here the chance of gaining by the trump lead 
may be taken as greater than the chance of losing. 
Thus with queen, knave, and two small trumps, a 
four suit with an honor, say for example, knave, ten, 
nine, and a small one, king guarded in the third suit, 
and queen guarded in the fourth, a small trump if it 
finds partner with an honor is by no means unlikely 
to win the game. If partner turns out very weak in 



WHIST. 



115 



trumps the leader must alter his plan, and, instead 
of continuing the trump lead, play to make three, 
five or seven tricks according to the fall of the cards 
in plain suits. 

Trump leads, without strength in trumps, can only 
be right in consequence of some special circumstance 
in the state of the game, or of the score. For instance, 
great commanding strength in all the plain suits may 
call for a trump lead ; or it may be necessitated to 
stop a cross ruff {i.e., the alternate trumping by part- 
ners of different suits, each leading the suit in which 
the other renounces), in which case it is o-onprally 
advisable to take out two rounds if possible ] so with 
the winning trump you play it out, whatever your 
others are. Again, if you have a wretched hand and 
you are love to three or four, you assume that the 
game is lost, unless your partner is very strong ; and 
if he is very strong, the trump is the best lead for 
him. This doctrine is frequently carried to excess, 
as, by concealing your weakness, you often stand a 
better chance of saving a point, if not the game, than 
by at once exposing it. If, therefore, you have one 
four suit, headed by an honor, you would generally 
do better to choose that. 

The trump lead is so much more important than 
any other that you should almost always return 
your partner's lead of trumps immediately, except he 
has led from weakness, when you are not bound to 
return it unless it suits your hand. 

If you find one of the adversaries without a trump, 
you should mostly proceed to estabhsh your long 
suit, and abstain from drawing two trumps for one ; 
to say nothing of the probability that the adversary 



116 



wmsT. 



who has not renounced is unusually strong in trumps. 
Besides, when he has the lead, he will very Hkely 
lead trumps in order to draw two for one ; and it is 
more advantageous to you that the lead should come 
from him. On the other hand, if your partner has 
no trump, it is often right to endeavor to weaken the 
adversaries by continuing even their trump lead. 

It is a common artifice, if you wish a trump to be 
led, to drop a high card to the adversary's lead, to 
induce him to believe that you will trump it next 
round, whereupon the leader will very likely change 
the suit, and perhajDS lead trumps. Thus, if he leads 
king (from ace, king, and others), and you hold 
queen and one other, it is evident that you cannot 
make the queen. If you throw the queen to his king, 
he may lead a trump to prevent your trumping his 
ace ; but if he goes on with the suit, and you drop 
your small card, it may fairly be inferred that you 
have been endeavoring to get him to lead a trump. 
Your partner should now take the hint, and, if he 
gets the lead, lead trumps ; for, if you want them led, 
it is of little consequence from whom the lead comes. 
By an extension of this system to lower cards it is 
understood that, whenever you throw away an un- 
necessarily high card, it is a sign (after the smaller 
card drops) that you want trumps led. This is a 
recognized signal, and is called asking for trumps. 

It is not always requisite to wait the completion of 
the signal. Thus, if your partner does not trump, 
but discards (say) an honor in another suit, it is clear 
that his hand must consist mainly of trumps and of 
the fourth suit, with considerable strength in each. 
The higher his discard, the more certainly is this so. 



WHIST. 117 



In such cases, your best game is to lead trumps to 
him, to clear them, that he may bring in his strong 
suit. If, then, he wants trumps led, he would 
naturally discard the highest card he could spare, and 
when he afterwards plays a lower, it is clear that he 
has been asking you for ti'umps. 

When your partner asks for trumps, and you have 
four or more, lead the smallest, unless you have three 
honors, or queen, knave, ten ; if you have only 
two or three trumps, lead from the highest down- 
wards, whatever they are (and see Appendix B, p. 
277). 

Before answering the signal, be sure that the higher 
card, previously dropped, is imnecessarilyhigh. For 
instance, a higher card is often played before a lower, 
to show that you command the suit, or that you hold 
the intermediate cards, or to get out of your partner's 
way. It is very important to distinguish between 
covering second hand and discarding an unnecessarily 
high card. For example, with knave, ten, and one 
other (say the three), it is usual to play the ten second 
hand on a small card. When your three comes down 
in the next round, it is not a signal for trumps, unless 
your partner can infer that you do not hold the knave. 
Moderate players, who know of the signal, never 
consider this ; so with them the choice of the least 
evil is generally not to cover, for you otherwise run 
the terrible risk of having a strengthening trump led 
to you with a weak hand. To ask for trumps, second 
hand, with knave, ten, and one other, you must play 
the knave. 

The use of strength in trumps being to disarm the 
opponents, it follows that you should as much as 



118 



WHIST. 



possible husband your strength for that purpose. 
Therefore when second player, 

14. DO NOT TRUMP A DOUBTFUL CARD IF 
STRONG IN TRUMPS. 

By a doubtful card is meant a card of a suit of which 
your partner may have the best. 

Whether you should trump or refuse to trump a 
doubtful card depends almost entirely on your strength 
in trumps. It has already been mentioned that it is 
an advantage to trump when you are weak, for you 
thus make a little trump, which is not available for 
the other uses of trumps, and which, if not used for 
trumping, will presently be drawn by the strong hand. 
It is conversely a disadvantage to trump a doubtful 
card when you are strong in trumps, for by trum^Ding 
you weaken your numerical power, and diminish the 
probabihty of your bringing in a suit. If, instead of 
trumping, you throw away a losing card, you inform 
your partner that you have strength in trumps (either 
four, at least, or one or twt) honors guarded), and 
also, by your discard, what your strong suit is ; and 
if your partner has any strength in the suit led, you 
put him in a favorable position. 

If you refuse to overtrum^D, or to trump a certain 
winning card, your partner should conclude either 
that you have no trump, or more probably four 
trumps and a powerful hand besides. He should 
presume you are reserving your trumps to bring in 
a suit, and should assist you by leading trumps as 
soon as he can. A refusal to be thus forced is seldom 
requisite if you have more than four trumps ; with 



"WHIST. 119 



six you are mostly strong enough to trump and to 
lead trumps ; with five you may do the same, if your 
suit is established ; but if not, it is generally best to 
take the force, and to lead your suit. 

The situations in which it is most necessary to refuse 
to overtrump your right-hand adversary, or to refuse 
to trump a winning card, occur when you have four 
trumps and a very strong suit, or a suit established 
early in a hand. For then, by trumping, you pre- 
judice your chance of bringing in the suit in order to 
secure one trick. By refusing to part with a trump 
in these cases you obtain the advantages just enumer- 
ated, at the time when they are most hkely to become 
of service ; and, where you refuse to overtrump, your 
adversary is left with one trump less, by which your 
hand is strengthened. 

Many players run into the extreme of always 
refusing to be forced by a winning card when they 
are strong in trumps. The situations, however, just 
indicated, are almost the only ones in which it 
answers to hold up ; and these even are liable to 
several exceptions. For instance : — 1. You should 
not persist in refusing to be forced if you find that 
the adversary has the entire command of his suit. 
2. You should not refuse if your partner evidently 
intends to force you ; and, 3. You should not refuse 
to overtrump if you have reason to conclude that 
your left-hand adversary is strong in trumps. 

With an untaught partner it is useless to refuse to 
trump ; he will not understand it, but will continue 
to force you. With such, the best course, is rather 
to make tricks when you can than to play for a great 
game. 



120 



WHIST. 



From what has just been said, it is evidently an 
advantage to 

15. FORCE A STRONG TRUMP HAND OF THE 
ADVERSARY. 

For you thereby take the best chance of preventing 
his making use of his trumps for bringing in a suit. 
If he refuses to take a force, keep on giving it to him. 

For instance, if he passes your king (led from king, 
queen, &c.), and the king wins, continue the suit, and 
so on. Some players can never be brought to under- 
stand this ; they do not like to see their winning 
cards trumped, and therefore frequently change their 
suit or even lead trumps when an adversary refuses 
to be forced. 

It now hardly requires to be stated that it is bad 
play intentionally to force a weak adversary, and 
still worse to lead a suit to which both adversaries 
renounce, as the weak will trump and the strong get 
rid of a losing card. 

If you have numerical strength in trumps, you are 
justified in forcing your partner, relying on your own 
strength to disarm the opponents. But 

16. DO NOT FORCE YOUR PARTNER IF YOU 
ARE WEAK IN TRUMPS. 

For you thus weaken him ; and so leave it in the 
power of the antagonists to draw all the trumps, and 
bring in their suit. If, then, a good partner refrains 
from forcing you, you may be sure he is weak ; on 
the other hand, if he evidently intends to force you 
(as by leading a losing card of a suit he knows you 



WHIST. 



121 



must trump), you may assume that he is strong in 
trumps, and you should take the force wilHngly, even 
though you do not want to be forced, depending on 
his strength to exhaust the adversaries' trumps. 

You may, however, though weak, force your 
partner under these circumstances. 1. When he has 
already shown a desire to be forced, or weakness in 
trumps, as by trumping a doubtful card, or by re- 
fraining from forcing you. 2. When you have a 
cross-ruff, which secures several tricks at once, and 
is therefore often more advantageous than trying to 
estabhsh a suit. 3. Sometimes when you are playing 
a close game, as for the odd trick, and often when 
one trick saves or wins the game or a point. And 4. 
Sometimes when great strength in trumps has been 
declared against you. 

If your partner leads a thirteenth card, or a card 
of a suit in which he knows that both you and the 
fourth player renounce, your play must depend on 
your partner's strength in trumps. If he is strong, 
he wants you to put on your best trump, either to 
make the trumps separately, or to force out one or 
two high ones, to leave himself with the command. If 
he is weak in trumps, he wants you to pass the card, 
that the fourth player may obtain the lead, and lead 
up to your hand. No general rule can be given as 
to the course to be pursued with regard to thirteenth 
cards. You must judge of the leader's intention by 
tJie score and the prev^ious fall of the cards. 



122 



WHIST. 



PLAYING TO THE BOAED. 



17. PLAY TO THE SCORE ; 

AND 

18. WATCH THE FALL OF THE CARDS, AND 
DRAW YOUR INFERENCES AT THE TIME 

These two all-important principles have already 
been mentioned as causing differences in the play. 
The commonest form in which the former is pre- 
sented to us is this : at the score of Love-all five tricks 
save the game against two by honors. It is often 
right, therefore, when two by honors have been de- 
clared against you, to go for the fifth trick by leading 
off a winning card, or by putting one on second or 
tMrd hand. 

To explain further what is meant by playing to the 
score, put yourself in this situation. Four trumps 
remain in, the adversaries have the two best trumps, 
it being uncertain whether they are in one hand or 
divided ; you have the two losing trumps, two forc- 
ing cards, and the lead ; you can only play correctly 
by referring to the score. Thus, if the adversary is 
at four, and you have won five, or even six tricks, 
your game would be to secure two tricks by forcing ; 
for if you play a trump and the two against you are 
in the same hand, you lose the game. But suppose 
you are at the point of two, and the adversaries are 



wmsT. 



123 



not at four, and you have won six tricks, your game 
would be to risk the trump ; for if you bring down 
the other trumps you win the game j but by playing 
to force you make certain of scoring only four. By 
applying this mode of reasoning you will often be 
directed as to a finesse late in a hand. 

For simple examples of drawing inferences at the 
time of the fall of the cards take the following : — 
1. You lead a small card from ace, knave, &c. ; your 
partner wins with the queen ; you should immedi- 
ately (i.e,, before another card is led) infer that the 
king cannot be with your right-hand adversary. 
Hence, on the return of the suit, you would not finesse 
the knave. 2. You are second player, and a suit is 
led in which you have king, ten, and one small one. 
You play the small one. The third hand plays the 
queen, which is won with the ace. You should at 
once infer that the third hand cannot have the 
knave, and that you may safely finesse the ten next 
round. 

You will greatly assist your memory by systemati- 
cally recording inferences in the above manner. In 
addition to this you should apply your knowledge of 
the principles to noting important points, not attempt- 
ing too much at first. Begin by counting the trumps 
as they fall, and notice, at all events, the honors, and 
remember the turn-up card. By degrees you will find ^ 
yourself able to recollect the ten and nine, and then 
the smaller trumps. Next attend to the suit led 
originally by each player, and watch in the second 
round whether the lead was from strength or weak- 
ness. Try also to remember the fall of the cards in 
your own strong suit, that you may know when it 



124 



WHIST. 



is established. Beyond this, experience will enable 
you to judge what to retain and what to reject in each 
hand ; so that, with practice, you will acquire what 
may be termed a whist memory, which will enable 
you, Avithout any great effort, to recollect the prin- 
cipal features of every hand. 

The following Examples are inserted to give an idea 
of the cases that occur in practice in which playing to 
the board is involved. 



CASE L 





4 












4 4- 

4 
4 4 






Y 

A B 
Z 


♦ 

^ ^ 






4 4 4 


^^^^^ 






4 4 
4 4 


4 4 4 

4 4 
4-4 4 






•^4-^4 
4 . 
4444 


4 4 4 
4 

4 4 4 














♦ 4» 




4- * 

4* 4 
4 4 




♦ ♦ 







Score : AB, three ; YZ, four. Spades trumps. 

AB have six tricks and have played two by honors. 
It is known from the fall of the cards that A has no 
trump ; also that Z has the long diamond. 



WHIST. 



125 



The PiiAT AXD Remarks. — A leads a small club. 

Y puts on the ace second hand. In order to save 
•and win) the game, Y and his partner must win every 
trick {see statement of score and of fall of the cards), 

Y sees that to do this Z must have two of the three 
remaining trumps. This being so, Z can have but 
one club, and Y therefore puts on the ace of clubs 
second hand. 

For other illustrations see Hands VII. and XIII. 



CASE n. 




Score : AB want two tricks to save the game. 
Hearts trumps. 



126 



WHIST. 



A knows Y to have the best heart ; also B to have 
the best diamond and weak spades. 

The Play ANit Remarks.— A leads the queen of 
spades, and then the losing trump. A takes the only 
chance of winning two tricks. To accomplish this 

Y must hold one spade and one diamond, as will 
appear by placing the unknown cards in any other 
way. A therefore plays on the assumption that 

Y holds a spade and a diamond in addition to the 
trump which is declared in his hand. 

For another illustration of leading a losing trump 
to place the lead see Hand XXXV. 



CASE ni. 

It is the duty of a player to make the game as easy 
to his partner as he can. The play often depends on 
the sort of partner. For example-: you lead the ten 
from king, queen, knave, ten, &c., or from king, 
knave, ten, &c. Suppose the lead to be from the 
former combination, and that your ten forces the ace 
from the fourth hand. You obtain the lead again. 
The proper lead now is the queen, as your partner 
knows you have king, knave, whereas he is uncertain 
about the queen. But, with an indifferent partner, 
the better lead is the king, as he may not have drawn 
the correct inference from the first lead, and knowing 
the queen is not the best, he may trump it. 



WHIST. 



127 



However good your partner may be, you should not 
put him into unnecessary difficulties. For example : — 



♦ ♦♦♦ 

♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ 
















♦ 






4. 4. 










4> * 




4» <^ 




♦ ^ 




♦ 



4 <t 4 



1» 



¥^¥ 



Spades trumps. Y can count two hearts, and queen, 
ten of spades in A's hand, and a small spade in Z's 
hand. 

The Play axd Remarks. — A leads the seven of 
hearts. Y should put on the king, though certain of 
being able to win with the nine. For, if Y wins 
with the nine, he compels Z to play, a coup, viz., to 
trump the best heart, in order to get the lead through 
the queen, ten of spades ; but, if Y wins with the king 
and leads the losing heart, it requires no ingenuity ou 
Z's part to trump it. 



128 



WHIST. 



COUPS. 



There is no Whist principle which should not be 
occasionally violated, owing to the knowledge of the 
hands derived from inference during the play. Some 
of the more frequent of the cases, where a general 
rule can he given for departing from rule, may 
advantageously close this Section. 

UEIADING FROM WEAKEST SUIT. 

is advisable in most cases where the game is 
desperate, and where it is clear that your partner 
must be strong in your weak suit to save the game, 
to lead your weakest suit, notwithstanding Principle 1 
(p. 66). Your partner should finesse deeply in the 
suit you lead him, and should not return it, but, 
actuated by motives similar to yours, should lead his 
weakest suit, in which you should finesse deeply, and 
continue your weak suit, and so on. 

For example: AB (partners) lead trumps. They 
win the first three tricks, and show four by honors, 
and three more trumps remain in A's hand. Con- 
sequently, if AB win another trick, they win the game. 
Y or Z now has the lead for the first time. His lead 
shoiild he from his weakest suit, on this principle : if 
his partner has not the command of it, or a successful 
finesse in it, the game is lost. Say Y leads, and Z 
wins the trick. Z should not return Y's lead, but 
should similarly lead his weakest suit. 

For an illustration of this coup, see Hand XXV, 



WHIST. 



129 



TREATING LONG SUITS LIKE SHORT ONES 
AND VICE VERSA. 

m 

It often happens towards the end of a hand, that an 
unplayed suit, of which the leader holds (say) four 
cards, can only go round twice, e.g., there may be two 
trumps left in one of the opponents' hands. In such 
a case, if your suit is headed by queen or knave, you 
should treat it as a suit of two cards only, and lead 
your highest, as this gives the best chance of making 
two tricks in the suit. 

The following case illustrates this point with refer- 
ence to the play of the second hand : — 




A (leader) has the last trump (clubs), the best spade, 
both declared in his hand, and the ace, queen of hearts 

9 



130 



WHIST. 



(a suit which has never been led;. A leads the queen 
of hearts ; the second hand ought to cover with the 
king. 

This case happened in actual play. T^^was a very- 
good player. Z remonstrated with him for not cover- 
ing ; Y defended his play by saying, that it is not 
the game to cover with four of the suit {see Analysis 
of Play of Second Hand, p. 91). But here Y should 
have reflected that the suit could only be played 
twice, and therefore he should have played as though 
he only had king and one small heart, alid have 
covered the queen. 

In the reverse case, where a suit can only go 
round once, it is obvious that a small card should 
be led, so as not to tempt partner to finesse. Thus, 
holding queen and one small card of an unplayed 
suit, which you are about to lead, all the oppo- 
nents' cards but one being winning cards, the proper 
lead is the small card. 

For an illustration see Hand XX. 

There is another case, known as Deschapelles' 
coup, where the proper card to lead is not deter- 
mined by the. leader's numerical power in the suit. 
It is this: all the adversaries' and partner's trumps 
are exhausted, and the leader's partner remains with 
an established suit. If the leader (not having any 
of liis partner's suit left) is obliged to open a fresh 
suit headed by king, queen, or knave, he should 
lead the highest card, irrespective of the number of 
cards he holds in the suit, that being the best 



WHIST. 



131 



chance of subsequently procuring the lead for his 
partner. 

For an illustration of this coup, see Hand XXYI. 

Deschapelles' coup often succeeds in practice, but 
it may generally be defeated by an attentive player. 
When the above-described position of the cards 
occurs, the adversary, if he has the ace of the fresh 
suit led, should not put it on first round. The suit 
will, in all probability, be continued with a low card, 
when the third player will most likely be compelled 
to play his highest, which will be taken by the ace ; 
and, having lost the card of re-entry, he never brings 
in his suit, unless he gets the lead in some other way. 

REFUSING TO WIN THE SECOND ROUNP 
OF A SUIT. 

This is a case of by no means infrequent occur- 
rence. For example : one of the adversaries has a 
long suit declared in his favor, which is led a 
second time. Only on^s trump remains in, which 
is in the hand of the second or fourth player. As 
a rule, the second round of the suit should not be 
trumped. The third round will probably exhaust 
the adverse hand, which is numerically weak in the 
suit. If it so happens that the player who is 
numerically strong in it has no card of re-entry in 
any other suit, he will then never bring in his long 
suit, as his partner, whose hand is exhausted, cannot 
lead it again, should he get the lead after the third 
round. If there is a card of re-entry in the hand 



132 



WHIST. 



of the player who has numerical strength, he must 
bring in the suit, whether the second round is 
trumped or not. 

Bee Hand XXVII. for an illustration of this position. 

A similar rule applies, but less frequently, when 
one adversary has the long trumps, and his partner 
a long suit nearly established. 

For an illustration of this position, see Hand XXVIII. 

declhting to draw the losing trump. 

When all the trumps are out but two, and the 
leader remains with the best trump, the losing trump 
being in the hand of his adversary, the natural and 
obvious play is to draw the last trump. 

But there is a class of cases in which the trump 
should not be drawn as a matter of course, viz., if one 
adversary has a long suit established, and his partner 
has a card of that suit to lead. 

The case usually happens in this way : YZ (partners) 
lead a suit, and after two rounds establish it. They 
then lead trumps from a suit of four trumps (see p. 
104). Eleven trumps come out, and A (YZ's adver- 
sary) has the lead and the best trump, one of the 
opponents having the losing trump. The question 
then arises, should A draw the trump ? 

A should draw the trump if he has also an estab- 
lished suit; or, if B (A's partner) has an established 
suit, and A can put the lead into B's hand. For, in 
these two cases, A or B cannot do better than bring in 
their suit. Again, A should draw the trump, if the 
adversary who has a suit established (say Z) has also 
the losing trump, for then, if either Y or Z has a card 



WHIST. 



133 



of re-entry in either of the other two suits, Z cannot 
be prevented from bringing in his established suit. 
Lastly, A should draw the trump if Y (Z's partner) has 
the losing trump, and Z has declared in his hand two 
cards of re-entry. This last case may be dismissed as 
of but little practical use, as, at the time when A has 
to decide whether he will draw the trump, he will 
seldom know enough about the remaining cards to be 
positive that Z has two cards of re-entry. 

In the above cases. A, by not drawling the trump, 
makes his adversaries a present of a trick. 

On the other hand, A should not draw the trump if 
one opponent (Z) has an established suit, which Y (Z's 
partner) can lead, the losing trump being in Y's hand. 
And, it is especially incumbent on A not to draw the 
trump, if either he or his partner has a suit which will 
probably be established by leading it, and if A can 
infer from the fall of the cards that Y has only one card 
of his partner's established suit in his hand, subject, 
of course, to the qualifications already noted. 

The point aimed at in not drawing the trump, is to 
force the card of re-entry in A's or B's'long suit out 
of the adverse hand. Y or Z thus obtains the lead, 
and continues the established suit, which A trumps 
with the winning trump. If, now, Z has no card of 
re-entry in the fourth — or unopened — suit, he never 
brings in his established suit, Y not having another 
card of it to lead. 

The case is difiBcult to carry when stated thus 
generally ; for an illustration see Hand XXIX. 



134 



WHIST. 



REFUSING TO OVERTRTJMP. 



Cases often happen where it is not advisable to 
overtrump. Most of these depend on the fall of the 
cards and on inferences from the play {see Hands XXI, 
XXII, XXIII), and cannot be generalized. But there 
is one case in which it is never right to overtrump, viz., 
when three cards remain in each hand, and one player 
holds the second and third best trumps, with one of 
which he trumps the card led. If the player to his 
left has the best and fourth best trumps, he can never 
gain anything by overtrumping, and may lose a trick, 
as the following example shows : — 





B 




WHIST. 



135 



The position of the trumps (spades) is known. A 
leads a heart, B trumps it. If Z overtrumps he 
loses the other two tricks, but if he throws the ace of 
diamonds he wins the other two tricks. 

This rule for not overtrumping cannot be laid down 
absolutely when there are more than three cards in 
hand ; but when only four trumps remain in, second 
and third best against best and fourth, it is so fre- 
quently advisable not to overtrump, that the player 
should consider well the position of the remaining 
cards before overtrumping. 

For an illustration of this case, see Hand XXX. 

Since it is so often right not to overtrump under these 
circumstances, it follows that when the case arises the 
player who holds second and third best should, as a 
rule, attempt to defeat the coup by playing a false 
card — t.e., he should trump with the higher card in 
hopes of deceiving his left hand opponent as to the 
position of the third best trump. 



THROWING HIGH CARDS TO PLACE THE 
LEAD. 

This coup presents itself in a variety of forms ; the 
following are selected as likely to be of use. 

Whenever you are left at the end of a hand with the 
tenace in trumps (either best and tliird best, or second 
best guarded) over the player to your right, and two 
other cards, both being cards of the suit led by him, 



136 



WHIST. 



you, second hand, should always throw the highest 
card of his lead to that trick. You can never lose 
by so doing, and may win. For example : you 
have nine and five of the suit led. Throw the 
nine. For, in the second round of the suit, it 
may so happen that you get the lead with the nine. 
If the cards lie thus, for instance :— 





If 








♦ ♦ 




♦ 4 

♦ 4 

♦ ♦ 






B 

Y Z 
A 
















4 


4 4- 
4 4 






♦ 444 
4 

4444 


* 4 ^ 








4 4 
4 4 
4i 41 




1 




* 11 





Y has the tenace in hearts (trumps) over A. A 
leads ace of clubs. If Y does not throw the nine, and 
Z plays carelessly and fails to win Y's nine in the next 
round, YZ lose a trick. Of course, Z ought to win 
the second round, but it is Y's duty to render it 
impossible for Z not to do so (see Remarks on Making 
it Easy to Partner, p. 126). 



WHIST. 



137 



The typical example of this coup is the case where 
the leader plays the ace, and the second player has 
king guarded, as in the following example : — 





Y 

















Spades trumps. There are only four spades in, and 
Y knows that A has the king, ten. B's and Z's cards 
are immaterial. 

A leads the ace of diamonds. K Y plays the two 
of diamonds he can only make two tricks ; but, if he 
throws the king to the ace, he still makes two tricks, 
and, if his partner has the queen of diamonds, he 
makes three tricks. 

This coup may be similarly played in plain suits. 
For an illustration, see Hand XXXI. • 
The following fine coup {which occurred in actual 



138 



WHIST. 



play) exemplifies a similar, but more complicated, 
case : — 

























4* 










4- 4- 




4- 


4- 











1 


B 

Y Z 

A 


4* 






4 * 4 


























4.^4. 

4.'^4. 


4- 
4. 4. 

4.-^4. 




*4.* 
4- * 

4* 4^ 





Score : YZ require every trick. Hearts trumps. It 
is known that the trumps lie between B and Z. 

A leads a club ; Y and B play small clubs. Z, 
knowing that B holds the second best trump guarded, 
takes the only chance of saving the game, by winning 
the first trick in clubs with the ace, and returning 
the queen. Y, seeing his partner's anxiety to get 
rid of the lead, rightly conjectures him to hold the 
major tenace in trumps. He, therefore, wins his 
partner's queen of clubs with the king, and saves 
the game. 

It being known that the remaining trumps lie be- 



WHIST. 



139 



tween B and Z, Y would be right to win the second 
round of clubs under all circumstances of the score. 

For another illustration of this coup, see Hand XXXII. 

On a similar principle, the leader not infrequently 
leads a losing plain card, or a losing trump, at the end 
of a hand, in order to place the lead. For illus- 
trations, see Case II, p. 125, and Hands XIV, XV, 
and XXXV. 



THE GRAND COUP. 

The Brand Coup consists in throwing away a super- 
fluous trump. At the first glance it^ppears impossible 
to have a superabundance of trumps ; but cases some- 
times happen where a player has a trump too many. 
To get rid of this trump — as by undertrumping a 
trick already trumped by your partner, or by trumping 
a trick which he has won, or which you know he may 
win— is to play the grand coup. 

The opportunity for playing the grand coup general- 
ly happens in this way. Two rounds of trumps come 
out, leaving five trumps in, two in the hand of (say) 
B, and three in the hand of Z (the player to his left). 
If B has the best and third best trumps, or the second 
best guarded, and trumps are not led again, nor used 
for trumping, it is clear that at the eleventh trick Z 
must obtain the lead, and must lead up to the tenace 
in trumps. If, before the eleventh trick, Z trumps a 
trick of his partner's (or, in the case of only seven 
trumps coming out in two rounds, undertrumps a 



140 



WHIST. 



trick already trumped by his partner), and the lead at 
the eleventh trick can thus be kept in — or put into — 
Z's partner's hand, the grand coup comes off, as in the 
following example : — 





♦ * + 

**4- 




❖ 4- 
4. 4. 




♦ 
♦ ♦ 




♦ 




♦ 4- + 

♦ 4- * 


B 

Y 2 
A 


















4-4' + 4' 
4* 

4.4.4.4. 




*4.* 
4- 4» 



















Clubs trumps. Z knows that B has ten and 
another trump. A leads the ten of diamonds ; Y 
trumps with the six of clubs ; Z undertrumps with 
the five. If he retains his three trumps, and B refuses 
to trump the queen of spades next led by Y, Z loses a 
trick in clubs. 

The opportunity for playing the grand coup is often 
missed. A player should always be on the look-out 
for it when he has five trumps, especially if a trump is 
led to his right. It* should be added also, that if 



WHIST. 



141 



the player who attempts it retains a high card in 
his hand, he may be just as badly off as though he 
remained with three trumps. Thus, holding three 
trumps against two, and ace and another card of 
another suit, it is not sufficient that he disposes of 
one of his trumps ; he should also get rid of his 
ace {see Remarks on Throwing High Cards to place 
the Lead, pp. 135-139). The following example will 
render this more clear : — 




Hearts trumps. B has already got rid of his super- 
fluous trump. A leads the eight of clubs. B should 
throw the ace of diamonds to it. For, if B has the 
lead after the next trick, he might just as well have 



142 



WHIST. 



kept his third trump. If A has the king of diamonds, 
B wins a trick by discarding the ace ; and, if A has 
not the king, B loses nothing by throwing the ace. 

An exception to this rule is when A has winning 
cards to go on with. Thus, if A had another club, B 
should not discard the ace of diamonds. This is too 
obvious to require working out. 

The following is another aspect under which the 
grand coup may present itself : — 



^41 



^ ♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ ♦! 
♦♦♦♦ 




♦♦♦ 



♦1* 



<Z 1 



Hearts trumps. It is known that B has king, 
queen, knave of trumps, and a losing spade or club — 
but uncertain which. 

A leads the knave of diamonds. B trumps it. Z 



WHIST. 



143 



should throw away a small trump, undertrumping B 
in order to keep two winning queens. If he discards 
a queen, he must do so at random, and perhaps throw 
away the suit of which B has the small one. By dis- 
carding his useless trump (which B would proceed to 
draw) he defers parting with either queen till after the 
next round, when the fall of the cards may assist him. 
B now leads a trump, and Y discards the losing club. 
B then leads another trump, and Z now knows that he 
ought to keep the spade. This case actually occurred 
in the presence of the writer, but Z, instead of under- 
trumping, discarded the wrong queen at random, and 
eventually lost the rubber in consequence. 

For further illustrations of the Gfrand Coup, see 
Hands XXXVII and XXXVIII. 



If the foregoing principles are reflectively perused, it 
will be seen that they mould the Theory of Whist into 
a harmonious whole. The Theory of Whist tells you 
how to play your own hand to the greatest advantage, 
how to assist your partner, and how to weaken and to 
obstruct your opponents ; in short, it teaches how to 
take the best chance of making the greatest number 
of tricks. This knowledge constitutes a sound player. 
If to theoretical perfection you add the power of accu- 
rate observation, and of acute perception, together 
with a thorough comprehension of the whist capacities 
of partners and of opponents, you have all the 
elements necessary to form a Master of the Science. 



PART II. 

HANDS. 



The following hands are given in illustration of the 
general principles discussed in Part I. The plan 
adopted in the arrangement of the hands is to imitate 
closely the circumstances of actual play. Thus, at 
starting, one player's hand is known, together with 
the score and the turn-up card. Each player is then 
caused to play a card in his turn, and at the end of 
the trick, the one player whose hand is known makes 
observations, and draws inferences from the play, as 
though he were at the whist table. 

A, Y, B, and Z, are the four players throughout. 
They are placed at the table in the above order, A and 
B being partners against Y and Z. A is the first 
leader, and Z the dealer. In " the play " the cards of 
each trick are placed in the order in which the players 
sit round the table, the card played by the person 
whose hand is under consideration being the one 
nearest to the reader. The capital letter by each card 
shows to which player it belongs. 

All the players are supposed to follow the ordinary 
rules of play, as laid down in Part I, and in the Ap- 
pendices. Thus, each player is credited with leading 
originall}^ from his strongest suit, and with leading 
the card of it indicated in the Analysis of Leads (pp. 
73-77) and in Appendix A ; with playing the lowest of 
a sequence when not leading ; with returning the 
highest of a numerically weak suit, the lowest of a 
strong suit, and so on. 



WHIST. 



145 



HAND I. 



A's Hand. 




Tbick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 




f A B,0 
Y Z, 1 




A 

Tricks | 

Eemark. — A leads from 
his strongest suit {see p. 66). 
Having no sequence, he leads 
the lowest card of the suit 
(see p. 70). 

The fall of the queen and 
ace in this round, leaves A 
with the winning diamonds and a small one, 
may be said to be established (see p. 67). 

10 



Tricks 



[ AB, 

i Y Z,2 



Remark. — A plays his 
lowest card second hand {see 
p. 88). 

B allowing the queen to 
win, may be presumed not 
to have the king. 

His suit 



146 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 



Cr 



B 




m 




















T 









Tricks 



[ A B. 1 
i Y Z, 2 



Remark. — It is unlucky 
that A is obliged to win his 
partners queen. The prob- 
ability is that B has the 
king, as queen is scarcely 
ever put on when a small 
card is led, unless the sec- 
ond hand has king also (see 
p. 91). 



Trick 4, 




Tricks { y z' 2 



Remark. — This is an in- 
structive trump lead. A, at 
the first start, with but four 
trumps, would not have been 
justified in leading a trump. 
But, his strong suit being 
established, and his partner 
having in all probability the 
best heart, his game is now 
to lead trumps. Consider 
carefully the management of trumps (pp. 112-115), and 
apply the arguments there made use of to the present 
situation. 



Trick 5. 



♦7*1 ^ 



♦* 

<^ - 

♦ 



^^4 



Tricks {-^IJ 
Bemakk (Trick 5).— A finesses the ten (see p. 95). 



Trick 6. 




TRICKS {^I'J 



WHIST. 



147 



Tbick 7. 



♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ 

♦ 4 



B 



♦ 



♦ 
♦ 

♦ 



Tricks 



[AB,4 
1 Y Z,3 



Tkick 8. 




Tricks ] 



Irick 9. 




Tricks {^^'^ 



Remark.— A forces the 
best trump, and remains 
with the thirteenth to bring 
in his long diamond. 



Trick 10. 




AB,6 
Y Z, 4 



Tricks 

Eemaek. — Well played 
by A. The general rule is 
to put on the winning card 
in the second round of a 
suit. In this case, if A 
follows the rule he will, after making his trump and 
diamond, be left with a losing club, the king being against 
him (see Remark, Trick 2). But if the king of clubs is in 
Z's hand (and there is nothing to show that it is not), A, 
by passing this trick, gives his partner a chance of making 
the knave, and still retains the ace to capture the king. 

Tricks 11 to 13.— Whatever B leads, A makes the 
remaining tricks, and 

A B win three by cards. 



148 



WHIST. 



THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above. ) 



Y's Hand. 
Ace, 6, 4 . . ^ 
Knv, 10, 8, 2 . 
Qn, 10, 9 . .4. 
10, 6, 4 . . . ♦ 



B's Hand. 

Kg, 7 ... 41 

Kg,Qn,9,5,4, y 

Knv, 4 . . . 4i 

Qn, 8,7, 5. . 4 



Z's Hand. 
Knv, 9, 8, 2 . . 
7, 6, 3 ... . 
Kg, 8, 5, 2 . . 
Ace, 3 . . . • 



HAND II. 

Trump lead from four moderate triamps. 
B's Hand. 



♦ 




WHIST. 



149 



Trick 3. 



♦ 
4 



♦ 
4 4 







B 

TRICKS I; 2 



Trick 4. 




Tricks {f|;f 



Remark (Trick 3). — B has four trumps, and defence in 
hearts and clubs, his partner's suit is established, and no 
adverse strength in trumps has been exhibited. B there- 
fore leads trumps. (Consider carefully the arguments at 
pp. 113-115, respecting leads from four trumps, and apply 
them to this case.) To judge when to lead from four 
moderate trumps is an important point in the game, 
which hands such as this are given to illustrate and ex- 
plain. 



Trick 6. 



Trick 6. 




AB, 3 
Y Z, 2 




TRICKS {^B, 8 



150 



WHIST. 



Trick 7. 



m 



B 



4- 
4- 



Tkicks { y z', 4 



Tbick 8. 



r 



A 



□ 



i f ¥ , 



B 



Tricks { y 5 



Tricks 9 to 13. — Z leads knave of hearts which B wins. 
B draws the two trumps (if he remembers that the seven 
is the best) and brings in the diamonds, and 



A B win two by cards. 



THE HANDS. 

(B's hand is given above.) 



A's Hand. 
Kg, 8 ... 4i 
5, 3, 2 ... V 
Knv, 7, 5 . . + 
Kg, Qn,6,5,3 ♦ 



Y's Hand. 
Ace, Qn, 4, 3 . ^ 
10, 7 .... f 
Kg, Qn,4,8,2 ^ 
8,1 .... ^ 



Z's Hand. 

9, 6, 2 .... 4^ 
Ace, Q, Kv, 9,8,4 f 

10, 9 . . . . + 
Knv. 4. . . . ♦ 



WHIST. 



151 



HAND III. 

A simple elementary hand, save in one point which 
demands strict attention to the rule respecting re- 
turned leads (see pp. 84-87). 

A's Hand. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



B 



.4 



» 4 



4 










♦ 


2 


Y 


t 




4 








4 



TRICKS I; J 

Remark. — A leads from 
his strongest suit [see p. 66). 
Holding ace, queen, knave, 
ten, lie leads out ace and ten 
(see Analysis of Leads, p.74). 



43r4 
4*i4 

4 

4' 4 



4^4 



4x4 
4^4 



AB, 1 
Y Z, 1 



Tricks 

Remark. — A continues 
his suit (see p. 79). 

As the cards happen to 
lie A would have been able 
to make a successful finesse 
' against the king of spades. 
But A, not having seen Z's hand, can only play on general 
principles. 



152 



WHIST. 



Tbick 3 



Trick 4. 



4 



♦ f 



♦ 
♦ 
♦ 

A 

TRICKS I; 1 



c 



♦ 
♦ ♦ 



♦ ^ 

♦ 4 



♦ ♦ 

A 

TRICKS I; J 



Trick 5. 



r 



Trick 6. 



B 






¥ 




¥ 




P 


m 


a 







B 














* 4- 







4* 



Tricks I; 2 



Tricks { y z| 3 



Remaek (Trick 6). — A has now the command of his 
suit, and four trumps. The adversaries have not shown 
any particular strength in trumps, either by leading them 
or by calling for them, though they have had the oppor- 
tunity of doing both, and A therefore assumes that the 
trumps are pretty evenly divided, and leads a trump {see 
p. 113). A is not deterred from opening the trump suit 
because an honor was turned up (see p. 112). 

B's winning the trick with the queen shows that Z has 
not got the king. 



WHIST. 



153 



Thick 7. 



B 



4- +1 



4* "4| 



TRICKS 1 I; 3^ 



Trick 8. 



V 



Tricks | ^ |; | 



Remark (Trick 7). — B returns his partner's lead of 
trumps (see p. 115). 

This is the important trick of the hand. Note the card 
returned by B, the seven, and if in doubt as to the fall of 
the trumps, look at the previous trick (see Law 91, p. 30). 
In that trick, the small clubs that fall are the three, six, 
and four, and in the present one, the seven, five, and ten. 
Nobody having played the two, A may place it by inference 
in B's hand, for the adversaries not winning the trick may 
be supposed to play their lowest cards. Assuming B to 
hold the two, it may be inferred that he has that card and 
no other left in the suit. For he returns the seven, a 
higher card than the two ; and the rule is to return the 
highest of two remaining cards, the lowest if holding more 
than two (see p. 85. Consider carefully the example given 
there, and apply it to the present situation). 

The king and knave are therefore in the opponents' 
hands, and divided. Z has the knave (which he turned 
up), and he has not the king, as he could not win the queen 
in the previous trick. Y must consequently hold it. 

It may be objected that this train of reasoning is too 
close and elaborate to serve the purpose of inexperienced 
players. It is, perhaps, a little difficult for an elementary 
hand ; but the careful observance of the rule of play re- 



154 



WHI5T. 



specting returned leads it so important, that it has been 
deemed advisable to insist strongly upon it. Of course, 
when playing with those who do not attend to the 
conversation of the game, all pains bestowed on working 
out the position of the cards from such data as the preced- 
ing is so much trouble thro^vn away. 

Assuming, then, that A's partner can be depended on 
to play according to rule, it is morally certain that the 
trumps are evenly divided, and that a third round will 
leave A with a long trump to bring in his spades. Accord- 
ingly, A leads the eight of clubs (see Trick 8, above). 



Trick 





8 


























A 



Tricks \y^[1 



Tbicks 10 to 13.— B (Trick 
10) leads a small diamond, 
though, as the cards happen 
to he, his lead is immate- 
rial. A trumps the dia- 
mond, and brings in the 
spades; and 



A B win three by cards. 



THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above.) 
Y's Hais'd. B*s Haxd. I Z's Haxd. 

9. 6, 5 . . . ^ 8, 4 ... 41 1 Kg, T, 3 . . 
Kg. 10, 8, 4, 2 y Ace, T, 5, 3 . V I Knv, 9 . . . ^ 
Kg. 10, 6 . . 4* Qn, 7, 2 . . + | Knv, 5, 4 . . 4» 
Ace, Kg. . . ♦ , Knv, 8, 5, 2 . ♦ [ Qn, 10,7, 6, 4 ♦ 



WHIST. 



155 




Tbick 1. 



B 



v1 



A 



THE PLAX 



Tbick 2. 



Tricks ||: I' J 

Eemaek.— -A leads from 
his strongest suit (see p. 
66). 



8 



Tricks | ^ ?' ^ 



Y Z, 1 

Remark.— It may be in- 
ferred that hearts are T's 
strongest suit. 



156 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 



Trick 4. 




THICKS I J 




Trick {yzls 



Kemark (Trick 3).—- A having found his partner weak in 
spades (see Trick 1), does not continue his suit {see p. 80). 

Trick 6. I trick 6. 





B 






¥ ¥ 










¥ ¥ 
¥^¥ 




¥ 


Y 






¥ 












¥ 




m 






A 

Tricks { ^ 





B 




♦ 




♦ 








♦ ♦ 
















iiii 



Remark. — Presuming the 
players are to be depended 
on for following the ele- 
mentary rules of the game, 
it is clear from the fall of 
the cards that Y holds the 
remaining heart, the nine. 
B drops the ten, so he ought 
not to have the nine, the 
rule being to play the lowest card when not able to win the 
trick. Z ought not to have another heart, for he returned 
the six {see Trick 4), and now plays the three. Having 
returned the higher card he can hold no more (see p. 84). 



TRICKS {4 I 3 

Remark.— It is evident 
that Z, dropping the ten, 
will trump the next round 
of diamonds. Nevertheless, 
A's game is to continue the 
diamond (Trick 7), to give 
Z the lead, and to make B 
last player. 



WHIST. 



157 



Trick 7. 




Trick 8. 



l» 41 



Tricks 



[AB, 4 
[Y Z,4 



Remark (Trick 7). — Y, dropping the nine of diamonds, 
may be taken to have no more, as, not being able to win 
the trick, he is assumed to play his smallest. The remain- 
ing diamonds are therefore with B. 



Trick 9. 




Remark. — Z, with ace, 
queen, second hand (see his 
hand below), follows the 
usual rule (see p. 90). It is 
open to argument whether 
Z should depart from rule 
in this case. But Z's hand 
is not the one under exam- 
ination. 



Trick 10. 




Tricks {41;^ 

Remark.— The fall of the 
queen of spades from Y 
shows A that the two re- 
maining spades are in Z's 
hand. Z's third card is the 
queen of clubs, which he 
turned up. 



158 



WHIST. 



Trick 11. 



B 



A 

Tricks 



Y Z, 5 



Trick 12. 




AB, 7 
Y Z, 5 

Eemaek (Trick 12).— A* s* lead here is instructive. He 
knows Ms partner (B) has one diamond and no spade and 
no heart (see Tricks 5, 7, and 10). B's other card must there- 
fore be a chib (trump). If it is the best trump, A wins two 
by cards by leading a trump. But if it is not the winning 
trump, a trump lead loses the odd trick. It is better to 
make certain of the odd trick than to risk losing it for the 
chance of winning two by cards ; for the odd trick makes 
a difference of two to the score. A, therefore, properly 
ensures the odd trick by forcing his partner (see p. 122). 

Suppose the score to be A B three, and T Z one. Then 
A would be justified in leading the trump at Trick 12. 
For, if B has the ten, AB win two by cards and the game ; 
and, if B has not the ten, AB lose the odd trick ; the score 
remaining AB three, TZ two. It is better to run the risk of 
this score for the sake of the game, than to make certain of 
scoring only four and of leaving the adversaries at one. 
A B win the odd trick. 



T-s Hand. 
Qn, Knv, 2 . ^ 
Qn, 9, 7, 5 . . f 

9, 8, 3 4- 

9,7,6 . ^ 



THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above 
B's Hand. 



10, 8, 2 ... . 

Knv, 10, 7, 5 
Kg, 8, 5, 3, 2 



4^ 



Z's Ha^s-d. 
Ace, 10, 8, 6, 8 4 
Kg, 6, 3 ... ¥ 
Ace, Qn, 4. . + 
Ace, 10. . . . 



WHIST. 



159^ 



In the following hands the comments will be fewer, 
it being assumed that explanations of ordinary play 
are unnecessary. 



HAND V. 

Illustrative of the advantage of returning the high- 
est of a short suit. 

A's Haxd. 




Tbick 1. 



1^ 

Y I+ * 

I 

Li* + 



4* 4-] 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



TRICKS { 41; J 




Tricks 



AB. 2 
Y Z, 

Kemark (Trick2).— A's finesse here is justifiable, because 
he has strength in trumps [see A's hand). With only three 
trumps, A's better play would be to secure the trick at once. 



160 



WHIST. 



Tbick 3. 




Eem ARK.— Note the ad- 
vantage of tlie return of the 
strengthening card at Trick 
2, in accordance with Gen- 
eral Principles (p. 84). The 
command is left with tlie 
presumably strong hand : 
and the queen is completely 
hemmed in. It is true the 
queen might have been in 
T's hand. In that case the 
queen must make whatever 
card is returned. A similar 
position occurs at Trick 9. 



Trick 5. 




Trick 4. 



A 



Tricks I ^ 



iRICKsIf 



Y Z, 1 

Remark.— A did not lead 
the trump at first ; but now 
he does so for these reasons : 
he has the long card of his 
suit ; trumps are his strong- 
est suit (p. 110) ; and the 
adversaries have had the 
opportunity of calling for 
trumps {see pp. 115-118), 
and have not made use of 
it, which is negative evi- 
dence that there is no very 
great strength of trumps in 
one hand. 



Trick 6. 



B 



¥ 

¥- ¥ 



¥ ¥ 



J 



TRICKS {^1; I 



WHIST. 



161 



Tkick 7. 




Tricks { y z' 4 



Thick 8. 




Tricks 1^1' ^ 



Remark (Trick 7).— A being strong in trumps passes 
the doubtful card (see p. 118). 



Trick 9. 



♦4^ 




Tricks 10 to 13.— A leads 
the nine of spades, which 
brings down all the out- 
standing trumps. A makes 
the thirteenth club and the 
trump ; the adversary makes 
the king of diamonds {see 
the hands below). 



Tricks [ 



A B win two bv cards. 



Y's Haxd. 

8, 7, 4 . . 
Qn, 10. 7, 3 

9, 8, 6 . . 
i^nv, 10, 9 . 



THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above.) 



+ 



B's Haxd. 
Qn, 10, 5 . . 
Knv, 8, 5 . . 
Ace, Knv, 3 , 
Ace, Qn, 3, 2 . 
11 



Z's Hand. 
Kg, Knv, 3 . . 
Ace, Kg, 9, 6 . 
Qn, 5, 2 . . 
Kg, 7, 5 . . . 



t 



162 



WHIST. 



HAND VI. 

Playing to the score. 
Y's Hand. 




Trick 1 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



^ 4- 
4- 4- 



Tbicks 



fAB, 1 
i Y Z, 




Tricks | i 



WHIST. 



163 



Trick 3. 




Tricks 



AB, 2 
Y Z, 1 



Trick 5. 




Tricks {^I'J 



Trick 4. 



Tricks | 



Trick 6. 



♦ 4 



Tricks 



[ AB, 2 
I Y Z, 4 



Remark (Trick 6).— The lead here is the point in the 
hand. Y has three tricks up ; there is a whole suit (clubs) 
against him, and his adversary B has called for trumps {see 
Tricks 3 and 4). It is, consequently, Y's duty to make five 
tricks (which save the game if Z has an honor) as quickly 
as possible. He, therefore, leads the ace of spades to make 
the fourth trick, and (Trick 7) forces his partner (though 
without any strength of trumps in his own hand, see pp. 
120, 121) to make the fifth. 



164 



WHIST. 



Trick 7. 



4» ^ 



TRICKS I ^|.J 



Trick 8. 







4. 4. 

4. 4. 














Y 




Tricks 



[ AB, 3 
I Y Z, 5 



Tricks 9 to 13.— A leads a trump (the knave, see his 
hand below), in obedience to the call. If B finesses (see 
his hand below), as he ought to do, he loses one more 
trick, and 

A B score the odd trick and two by honors. 



THE HANDS. 

(Y's hand is given above.) 



A's Hand. 
Qn,4. . . . ♦ 
10,8,4,3 . . V 
Kg, 9, 7, 2 . . * 
Knv, 5, 3 . . ♦ 



B's Hand. 
Kg .... 4^ 

7,6,5 . . . f 
Ace, 8, 6, 5, 3 4» 
Ace, Kg, 10, 7 # 



Z's Hand. 
Knv, 10,9, 7,3,2 ^ 
Knv, 9 . . . y 
10, 4 .... + 
Qn, 9, 2 . . . ♦ 



At Trick 2, B, with the club suit well-nigh established 
(assuming his partner to have led from strength), and four 
trumps, two honors, should risk a trump lead. He cannot 
lose the game ; and if his partner has an average hand, 
a trump lead will, in all probability, give A B a good score. 
As a matter of fact it would win the game, but that proves 
nothing. 



WHI^T. 



165 



HAND VII. 

Playing to the score and to the fall of the cards. 
Z's Hakd. 




Score : 
AB, one ; YZ, three, 

Eight of hearts turned up. 




Trick 1. 



Aj * 



THE 



PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



Fa* 



Tricks { y 1; ? 



Tricks I Y I' i 



166 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 




Y Z, 2 



Trick 5. 



♦ 
♦ 
♦ 



Remark 
for one. 



Tricks { y z', 2 
— Drawinsj two 



Trick ' 



4* ^\ 
4* 4- 



4, 4. 



4. <iS. 
4. 4. 



Tricks 1 4^1; I 



Trick 4. 



¥ ¥ 



Tricks 



[ A B, 2 
1 Y Z, 2 



Trick 6. 




Tricks {4 



Trick 8. 



❖ * + 



Tricks 



A B, 4 
Y Z, 4 

Remark. — Y must have 
knave. 



WHIST. 



167 



Trick 9. 



♦ ♦ 



Tbick 10. 




TRICKS I; ^ 



Remakk (Trick 9). — Z plays well to put on ace second 
hand, as lie can then bring in the clubs. If A gets the lead 
he brings in the spades, and wins the game. 

♦ 

Teicks 11 to 13.— Z (Trick 11) leads a club ; T makes 
two more tricks in clubs, and 

YZ win two by cards. 



THE HANDS. • 

(Z's hand is given above.) 



A's Haxd. 
Q, Kv, 7,6,5,3,2 ^ 
Ace, Qn, Knv ^ 

6 * 

Kg, Qn . . . ♦ 



Y's Haxd. 
Ace . . . . ^ 
Kg, 7, 6, 5, 2 . V 
Knv, 10, 5,4, 3 ♦ 
7, 2 .... ♦ 



B's Hand. 
Kg, 8, 4 . . .4 
10, 9 .... ^ 
Ace, 9, 7 . . • ♦ 

10, 9, 6, 4, 3 . ^ 



At Trick ^, Y plays badly to trump the doubtful spade 
(see p. 118). At same trick, B plays well to get rid of the- 
command of his partner's suit (see p. 98). as A, from the 
lead, must have knave of spades, and Z, from the previous 
fall of the cards, must have the ten single. 

At Trick 4. Y's continuing the trump is bad. after ruining 
his numerical strength. For he has no particular strength 
out of trumps (see his hand), and his partner is evidently 
very weak in trumps. 



168 



WHIST. 



As the cards happen to lie, if Z does not put on ace of 
diamonds second hand at Trick 9, A brings in the spades, 
and Y Z lose the game instead of winning it. 



HAND VIII. 

Counting the cards. 
Z's Hand. 
If. 




Two of clubs turned up. 



Trick L 




THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



Tricks { y 1; J 
Remark. — A's lead Is 
either from king, queen, 
ten, &c., or from four 
trumps only, headed by 
tierce to the king (see 
Analysis of Leads, p. 75). 



5P y 



T 

Tricks { y 1,' 1 
Remark. — Y's lead is 
from ace, queen, knave, &c., 
or from five at least [see 
Analysis of Leads, pp. 73- 
75). It must be the latter, 
as Z holds the knave. 



WHIST. 



169 



Tbick 3. 



♦ ♦ 



♦ 
♦ 



2 

Tricks \ 



A B, 2 
Y Z, 1 



Kemaek.-— The lead is 
from five diamonds at least. 



Trick 4. 



r- 



♦ 












4. 4. 




♦ ♦ 




4.^4. 
















z 





Tricks 



( A B, 3 
[Y Z, 1 



Remark. — Y putting on 
queen can have no more 
diamonds. 



Trick 5. 




TRICKS I; 4 

Remark. — From B's not 
returning his partner' s trump 
lead, it is probable that he 
has no more trumps. 



Trick 6. 



I4> ♦ 



Tricks | ^ ^' 

Remark. — The inference 
(Trick 5) is strengthened 
from the fact that B leads 
winning cards. 



170 



WHIST. 



Trick 7. 



4. 4. 



Mb 



Tricks { 4: 1' ^ 

Eemark.— Y lias king of 
spades. 



Trick 8. 




Tricks 



[AB, 6 
[Y Z, 2 



Thicks 9 to 13. — Z can now count all the hands. A has 
the three remaining diamonds, and queen, ten of cluhs [see 
Eemark, Trick 1) ; Y has two hearts, the best and another 
(for if B had the best heart he would have led it at Trick 
7), king of spades, and knave and another trump. Z's cor- 
rect lead, therefore, is the trump, notwithstanding that the 
adversary has led trumps, and that the lead will draw two 
for one. By leading the trump, Z makes certain of all the 
remaining tricks but one. If Z leads the diamond, and 
then the trump, he may equally make every trick but one ; 
but, by playing in this way, he puts Y into difficulties. Z 
accordingly (Trick 9) leads six of clubs. A wins, and 
(Trick 10) leads five of diamonds. Z wins, and (Trick 11) 
leads seven of clubs ; Y Z make the remaining tricks, and 
A B win the odd trick. 



THE HANDS. , 

(Z's hand is given above.) 



A's Haxd. 
9, 3 .... 4^ 

Kg,Qn, 10, 9,3 
Ace, 10, 9,5,4,2 ^ 



Y's Hais-d. 
Kg, 5, 2 ' ' ^ 
Ace, 10, 8, 4, 3 ^ 
Ace, Knv, 4 . ^ 
Qn, 8 . . . ♦ 



B's Haxd. 
Knv. 10, 8, 7, 6 4b 
Kg, Qn, 7, 6, 5 ^ 

8, 5 ^ 

7. ..... ♦ 



WHIST. 



171 



HAITD IX. 

Counting the hands ; success of irregular play. 
B's Hand. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



4> 4-1 



8 

TRICKS I; J 

Remakk. — A's lead, ace 
and a small one (.seeTrick 2), 
shows five clubs at least. 



4. 4. 

4* 4- 



•I- 

4» 



4» ^ 



4' * 



3 



TRICKS {fI J 

Remark.— The king of 
clubs is most probably in 
Z's hand. 



172 



WHIST. 



Thick 3. 




Tricks | y 2' l 



Trick 5. 




TRICKS { A B. 2 



Trick 7. 



r 









































B 



Trick 4. 



rr 



♦ ♦ 



B 



TRICKS I; I 



Trick 6. 



B 



TRrcKs 



[ A B, 2 
[ Y Z, 4 



Trick 8. 



IS. 



A 




♦li- 
ft 




















♦ ♦ 






B 





tricks { A B, 3 



WHIST. 



173 



Tbiok 9. 



Trick 10. 





A * 

























Tricks I; ^ 



♦ 
♦ 



¥ ¥ 

¥ 

¥ ¥ 



¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 



TRICKS I; ^ 



Remark (Trick 10). — B is in a position of difficulty. 
Acting on his inference (Trick 2), he places the remaining 
cards thus before he leads : Y, ace of hearts, two of dia- 
monds (Y returned the five at Trick 8, and so may very 
well hold the two), and two losing clubs ; Z, king of clubs 
(see Remark, Trick 2), and the remainder of his hand dia- 
monds. B, therefore, concludes, that if he clears the heart 
suit he will get the lead with the queen of diamonds, and 
make two more tricks, only losing the odd. 

Trick 11. 



♦ ♦ 



A 



¥ 
¥ 
¥ 



•5* +1 



TRICKS {^IJ 



Trick 12. 



♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ 



4- ^ 



¥ ¥ 

B 



Tricks 1^1; ^ 



Trick 13. — The king of clubs turns out after all to be in 
IT'S hand. Y makes the last trick, and 

YZ score two by cards and two by honors. 



174 



WHIST. 



THE HANDS. 

(B's hand is given above.) 



A's HAIfD. 

9, 8, 3 ... ^ 

10, 5, 4 . . , ^ 
Ace, Qn,8,6,3 
Kg, 9 . . . # 



Y's Haxd. 
Qn, Knv,2 . ^ 
Ace, 9, 2 . . ^ 
Kg, 10, T, 5, 4 4; 
Ace, 5 . . . ♦ 



Z's Haxi^. 
Ace, 10, 5 . . .4^ 
Qn, Knv ... V 

9, 2 4; 

Knv, T, 6, 4, 3, 2 ♦ 



At Trick 2, Y's pla}- in passing the club, with only three 
ti'umps in hand, is not good. T knows that either B or Z 
will be obliged to trump , and Y, being numerically weak 
In trumps, should not run the risk of allowing liis partner 
to be forced. Y*s play turns out very luckily. It causes 
B to place the king of clubs probably in Z's hand, because 
the chances are against any given player (in this case Y) 
being strong in trumps, and only strength in trumps would 
justify Y in risking a force on his partner. Consequently, 
B miscounts the hands, and loses the game. The result, 
Jwicever, is no criterion. 

At Trick 10, if B could place either the remainder of the 
club or diamond suit with certainty, he could save the 
game by leading queen of diamonds. The hand is unusual, 
partly owing to the fact that the hands cannot be counted 
even at this late period. It is also instructive, as warning 
not to judge bij results: for B's good play loses him the 
game, and Y's bad play wins it. 

Y plays veiy well at Trick 9 In not putting on ace of 
hearts ; it being demonstrable that if he does so he cannot 
win two b}' cards (for he can count the hands, but the in- 
ferences being long, and not bearing on B*s play, are 
omitted). Y also plays well at Trick 11, in leading the 
under club, so as to secure the tenace. 



WHIST. 



175 



HAND X. 

Discarding, and playing to the score. 
Z's Haxd. 




turned up. 



Trick 1. 



THE FLAY. 

Trick 2. 



C, 



♦ ♦ 



♦ 



♦ 
♦ 

z 

TRICKS If I J 



C 



♦ ♦I 
♦ 



♦ 4 



Tricks 



' A 2 



I Y Z, 

IIp:makk. — T lias called 
for trumps. 



176 



WHIST. 



Thick 3. 



r 

A 



♦ ♦ 
♦ 



♦ 4 



Tbick 5. 



Tkick 



¥ ¥ 



¥ V| 



THICKS I; 2 







¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 
¥^¥ 




¥ ¥ 

¥ ¥ 

¥ 
¥^¥ 

¥ ¥ 






z 





tricks}^. I; I 



% ♦! 

4^ ♦! 



4> 4 



4» 



Z 

Trick 



( A B. 2 
( Y Z. 5 



Trick 4. 



1 



¥ ¥| 

V i 

V ¥i B 
¥ ¥! 



Tricks { y z' ? 



Trick 6 



1^ 



Tricks 1^^' ^ 



Trick 8. 



4^ 4» 
4 ♦ 



4 



TRICKS {^^ I; 2 



WHIST. 



177 



Tkicks 9 to 13. — Y (Trick 9) leads a spade. Z puts on 
the ace, as that cai:d and the twotrnmps iii Y"s liand make 
the game. If Z finesses he only scores four, as will be seen 
by referring to the hands below. 



The hand is instructive on these grounds. T is directed 
to the spade suit by Z's original discard of a club at TrickG 
(see p. 103), notwithstanding that Z has since discarded two 
spades. Z plays properly to keep his queen of clubs guarded 
after his first discard, as he only wants at most two tricks 
besides the two trumps which he knows to be in Y*s hand. 
Y, at Trick 8, leads a heart to show he has all the other 
hearts, as it is possible that the best heart may be held up 
by the adversary. Y thus tells Z not to finesse if he has 
one trick certain {see score). 

Z'S play would not be right if he had only five tricks up, 
as he would then want one more trick to win the game. 
In that case he should finesse. This is a good illustration 
of playing to the score. 

Y Z score three by cards and two bv honors. 



THE HANDS. 



A's Haxd. 
Kg, 9, 8, 3. . 
Kg, 2 . . . 

Kg, 9, 5 . . 

Ace, Kg, 10, 4 



(Z's hand is given above. ; 

B's Haxd. 
Knv, 10, 4, 2 
10, 7. 4 . . . 
Ace, 10, 7, 3 . 



Y's Haxd. 

5 ^ 

Ace,Knv,8,5,3 ? 

Knv, 6 . . . 4» 

Qn. 9. 8. 6, 5 . ♦ 
12 



Knv, 2 . 



♦ 



WHIST. 



HAND XI. 

Grettiiig rid of command of partner's suit, and 
conveying information. 

Z's Ha^^-d. 




Four of liearts turned up. 



Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



m 



m 



Z 

Tricks 



f AB, 1 
lY Z,0 




179 



TuiCK 3. 




Tricks { y z' 1 



Trick 5. 



Tricks { y |; ? 



Trick 



♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ 



♦ 



Tricks 



f A B, 3 
I Y Z, 4 



Trick 4. 




Tricks ■ 



A B, 3 
Y Z, 1 



Trick 6. 




TRICKS {4 f I 



Trick 8. 




Tricks 



f AB, 3 
I Y Z, 5 

Eemauk (Trick 8). — Z, finding that all the remaining 
diamonds (viz., the 9 and 5j are in Y^'s hand, throws the 



180 



WHIST. 



ten on the queen that he may leave the command in the 
hand which has the greatest numerical strength (see p. 9S). 
If he does not play thus he loses the odd trick, as Avill 
appear by referring to the hands below. 

Y plays badly in leading the queen. He should feel cer- 
tain that Z's lead was from four diamonds, and should 
therefore have led the small diamond in order to keep the 
command in his own hand. 



Trick 9. 



♦ ♦ 



z 

Tricks 



f AB. 3 
1 Y Z, G 



Trick ii. 




Trick 10. 




Tricks I; 3 



Remakk (Trick 11).— B 
(who has ace of s^Dades and 
a club) plays disgracefully 
here. He should save the 
game by putting on the ace 
of spades, and leading the 
club, of which it is evident 
A has the command, for he 
led the queen originally (and 
king and ace being out), the 
lead is almost certainly from 
queen, knave, ten, &:c. (see 
Analysis of Leads, p. 76). Besides, to make assurance 
doubly sure, A (Trick 10) discards the best club, showing 
that he has the entire command of the suit {see p. 110). 
YZ Avin two bv cards. 



Tricks 1; ^ 



wmsT. 



181 



A's Haxd. 
10, 9 4^ 



Qn, 8 y 

Q,Kv, 10,6,5,4,2 * 
7,4 



THE HANDS. 

(Z's hand is given above.) 
Y's Haxd. 

8, 7, 6 .... 4, 

Knv, 10, 9,6. 

Kg * 

Ace,Q,Knv,9,5 # 



B's Hand. 

Ace, Qn, 4, 3,2 ^ 
Kg, 7, 3, 2 . . ¥ 
Ace, 7 .... * 
Kg, 3 ♦ 



HAND XII. 

Finessing. 
A's Hand. 




182 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 




Trick 5. 



Trick 7. 



Tricks I; 2 



4> ^. 



Trick 4. 



4. 4. 



B 

4. 4. 



4 4 



4* J. *i* 



Tricks {41; 2 



Trick 6. 



TRICKS 1 4 I; 2 





Tricks I y z,' 3 



Trick 8. 



r 



B 




4. 
4. 4, 




4. 4. 




4»*^ 
















A 





TRICKS {^B. 4 



WHIST. 



183 



Trick 9. 



A 

Tricks < 



AB, 4 
Y Z, 5 



Remark (Trick 9).— A's 
finesse is unlucky. He has 
no indication as to the posi- 
tion of the queen. The fi- 
nesse must not be judged by 
the result. It is generally 
right against one card if the 
success of the finesse wins 
the game. 



Tkicks 10 to 13.— YZ make two tricks in diamonds (see 
their hands helow) ; and 

YZ win the odd trick. 



THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above.) 



Y's Hand. 
Kg, Qn, Knv,4 4 
Qn, 5 ..... V 
Ace, 4, 2 . . . ♦ 
Kg, Knv, 8, 5, ♦ 



B's Hand. 
Ace, 9 .... ^ 
Ace, 10, ... If 
9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 3 
Qn, 9, 3 . . . ♦ 



Z's Hand. 
10, 8, 5, 3 . . 
3, 3, 2 . . . . 
Kg, Qn, 10. . 
Ace, 4, 2 . . . 



♦ 



184 



WHIST. 



HAND XIII. 

Counting the hands, and refusing a finesse. 
Z's Hand. 




Trick U 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



TRicKsff I; J 



4- 4J 



4. ^ 



Tricks 



'J 



f AB, 
1 Y Z, 



Remark (Trick 1). — A has not both king and queen of 
diamonds, or he would have led one. B has not either 
king or queen of diamonds, or he would have played one of 
them instead of the ace. Therefore, Y must have one of 
those cards. Z draws this inference at the time. It will 
not be of any use to him until near the end of the hand. 



WHIST. 



185 



T&ICK 3. 





M 


+ + 












z 



'J 



Tricks | ^ f ' I 
Remark. — B has led from 
at least five clubs. 



Tbick 4. 



¥ 9 



9 V 



Y 



9 



TBICKsj^l'J 



Trick 5. 



Trick 6. 




4 



Tricks I; I 



TRICKS {^f; 2 



Remark (Trick 6). — The policy of this lead is doubtful. 
Players are apt to show their suits in this manner. But it 
Is clear, the opponents having led diamonds and clubs, that 
if Z has strength in any suit it is in spades. The objections 
to showing a suit in this way are : 1, that it may be trumped 
the first round ; 2, that partner may have only one card of 
it. In the latter case he cannot return the lead, and must 
open or continue another suit to a disadvantage. 



186 



WHIST. 



Trick 




Tricks I f^; 2 

EemaHk. — Y has the Jong 
trump. 



Trick 9. 



Trick 8. 



Z 

Tricks ' 



A B, 2 
Y Z, T 

































n 






♦ 





TrI0Ks{|:|; I 



Trick 10. 




Tricks i 



Eemaek (Trick 9). — Z's play in not finessing is very good. 
He can count Y's hand, thus : Y has no more clubs [see 
Kemark, Trick 3), he has the last trump, and three other 
cards. These cards m.ust either he queen, ten of spades, 
and a diamond, in which case Z's play does not matter ; or 
the nine returned by Y must be his best spade, in which 
case he can only have one more, as he would return the 
highest of two remaining cards (seep. 85), and his other 
cards must then be two diamonds. Therefore, assuming 
the case in which Z's play does matter (/. e., of Y's nine 
being his best spade), Y's diamond must be guarded. 



WHIST. 



187 



Consequently, Z, by not finessing, makes sure of the 
game. He requires one more trick besides the ace of spades 
and his partner's trump, and this trick T is certain to make 
in diamonds if Z leads through A's hand {see Kemark, 
Trick 1). 



Tricks 10 to 13. — Z (Trick 10) leads a diamond, and 
however A plays, 

YZ score three by cards and two by honors. 



THE HANDS. 



(Z's hand is given above.) 



A's Hand. 
Qn, 8, 3 . . ^ 
Knv, 7, 4 . . Y 
9, 8, 5 ... 4, 
Kg, Knv, 7, 5 f 



Y's Haxd. 
9, 5 ... . 
Qn, 10, 6, 5 . 
Kg, Qn, 7 . . 
Qn, 10, 9, 6 . 



B's Hajtd. 
10, 7, 6, 4 . . . 4^ 
9, 8, 3 .... V 
Ace, Kv, 10, 3, 2 ^ 
Ace ^ 



As the cards happen to lie, YZ only score four if Z 
finesses at Trick 9, and A plays properly. A, on winning 
this trick with the queen of spades, should see that his 
only chance of making two more tricks is to be led up to 
in diamonds. He should therefore (Trick 10) lead the 
seven of diamonds, which Y is comnelled to take, and AB 
save the game. 



188 



WHIST. 



HANB XIV, 

Leading losing card to place the lead 
{see pp. 135-139). 

B's Hand. 




THE 



TRICK 1. 



♦ ♦ 

B 



Teicks { y "1; ^ 




TmcKg 



WHIST. 



189 



Tbiok 3. 




Remaek. 
of spades. 



Tricks { y 1; 
-Y has the king 



Trick 4. 




Tricks {4 z t 
Eemabk. — It is probable 
that A is weak in trumps 
as he refused to force his 
partner in diamonds. Nevertheless, B leads a trump, as 
he is well provided in spades, and has some defence in the 
club suit. 



BICK 5. 



¥ ¥ 



.¥ ¥ 



¥ ^ 

i ¥ ¥ 



Tricks 



f AB, 5 
I Y Z, 



Trick 6. 



¥ ¥ 



¥ ¥ 

¥1¥ 



♦ ♦ 



B 



TRICKS {-^ I; ^ 



Remark (Trick 6). — The queen of hearts must be in Z's 
hand, as A returned the four and now plays the two, and Y 
renounces. 



190 WHIST. 



Thick 7. 




Tricks j y z' 1 



Trick 9. 




Tricks}^. I; I 



Trick 8. 




Tricks 



i A B, 6 
i Y Z, 2 



Trick 10. 



♦ 4 



♦ 

4 ; 



v.: 



4. 4* 

4. •5* 4. 

4. 4> 



B 



Tricks {41;^ 



Eemark (Trick 10).— B leads the losing club to throw 
the lead into Y's hand. Y will then be obliged to lead a 
spade, as he has no other suit. Z will have to follow suit, 
or will be forced with the queen of trumps, and B will 
make the ace of spades and the last trump. 



Tricks 11 to 13.— Y (Trick 11) leads a spade, B puts on 
the queen, and 



A B score three by cards and two by honors. 



WHIST. 



191 



THE HANDS. 

(B's baud is given above.) 



A's Haxd. 

10, 9, 7 . . .4b 
Knv, 4, 2 . . ^ 
Kg, 5 . . . * 
Ace, Kg, 6, 3, 2 ♦ 



Y^s Hand. 

Kg,8,5,3, 4 . 4 

6, 5 .... y 

Ace, Qn, 9,4. ^ 

Qn. 8 . . . ♦ 



Z*s Haxd. 
6, 2 .... ^ 
Qu, 10, 8, 7 .V 
10, 7, 3 . . . «ft 
10, 9. 7, 4 . . ❖ 



HAND XV. 

Leading losing card to place the lead {see pp. 135-139). 
Y's Ha^d. 




Tkick 1. 



THE PLAY 

Trick 2. 





































J 



Y 

Tricks ' 



AB, 
Y Z, 1 



♦ 



♦ 



♦ 



Tricks { y-f' 2 



192 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 





4. 4. 












4.. 4 




*4.-^l 






B 




4* 4-j A 


B 








4» 

4. -5- 4. 
4. 4. 




4- 4'i 













Trick 4, 



Tricks 



f AB, 1 
lY Z,2 




TRICKS J 



Trick 5. 



Trick 6. 





















4- 


4* 














A 4. 






4* 




4- 4- 


A 


B 


4. 4. 




4- 




4- 4- 










4. 4. 




4- 




4- 












4- 4- 










Tricks | 2' ^ 



TRICKS {^B,l 



Trick 7. 



Trick 8. 



♦ ♦! 




TRICKS 141; J 



Tricks { 4 I' J 



WHIST. 



193 



Trick 9. 




Trick 10. 



TRICKS {^f J 




THICKS {f. I; 2 



Trick il. 



Tricks}^ I; ^ 



Remaek (Trick 11).— Y 
leads the losing spade to put 
the lead into A*s hand [see 
fall of the spades, Tricks 1, 
4, and 10), and so compel A 
to lead hearts up to Z. At 
this score (YZ, one) this is 
the best chance of four by- 
cards. If the score were 
YZ, love, Y should lead a 
heart, as leading the spade 
gives up all chance of five 
by cards. 



Tricks 12 and 13. — Z has ace, queen of hearts ; and 
YZ win four by cards. 



THE HANDS. 

(Y's hand is given above.) 



A's Ha]^d. 

Kg, 9, 8, 7 . 
Kg, 2 . . 
Qn, Knv, 8, 7 . 
9, 8, 5 . , 



B's Haxd. 





6, 4. 3 . . 


• 4» 




Knv, 9, 7, 6 




• + 


10, 6, 3 . . 






10, 4, 3 . 






13 





Z's Hajo). 
Knv, 2 . . . ^ 
Ace, Qn, 8, 5, 4 ^ 
Ace, Kg, 4 . fl(» 
Ace, Kg, 7 . ♦ 



194 



^VHIST. 



HAND XVI. 

Underplay. 



Z's Ha^-d. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



4- 4- 







<• 4- 








•5- 
















B 


A 
















1 











Tricks 



\AB, 2 
I Y Z, 



WHIST. 



195 



Trick 3. 




Tbick 6. 



Trick 7. 



TRICKS I; g 



♦ ♦ 



♦♦♦ 



TRICKS { A B, 5 




Tkick 4. 




Trick 6. 



1^ 



TRICKS 

Remaek. — The nine of 
hearts looks like the best of 
a weak suit {see p. 78). 



Trick 8. 



4> 4* 
4* 



¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 



♦ ♦ 



TRICKS I; I 



196 



WHIST. 



Trick 9. 




Tricks < 



Trick 10. 



m 



Tricks 



\AB, 6 
t Y Z, 4 



Eemaek (Trick 9). — This is an example of underplay 
{see pp 100-102). Z leads an under trump up to the weak 
hand (see Remark, Trick 6), in hopes that Y may win the 
trick, and be able to give some assistance in the spade suit, 
whereby the three tricks necessary to save the game maybe 
made out of the remaining five. 

A, suspecting underplay, puts on the Idng second hand. 



Tricks 11 to 13.— Z leads a spade, which Y wins with 
the ace, and returns. On the return Z does not finesse, as 
there is another trump in. Were all the trumps out the 
finesse would be safe ; for then there would be only spades 
left in, and, consequently, no fear of losing the game by not 
makinsT the kins:. 



A B win the odd trick. 



A's Haxd. 
Qn,4, 2 
Kg, 10, 7, 3 . 
10, 9. 3. 2 . . 
Ace, Knv . . 



THE HANDS. 

(Z's hand is given above.) 
Y's Hand. 
4 Ace, 9, 3 . . ^ 
f Qn, Knv. 4 . ^ 

♦ Kg, 8, 5, 4 . .4 

# 9, 3, 2 ... # 



10, 8, 7 . . . . ^ 

9. 2 ¥ 

Ace, Qn, 6 . . + 
Kg, Qn, 10, 6, 4 



WHIST. 



197 



HAND XVII. 

Underplay, and playing to the score. 
Y's Haot. 




Trick 1, 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 




TRICKS 1^1; J 




Tricks 



f AB, 
[Y Z, 2 



198 



WHIST. 



Tbick 3. 




Teick 4. 



4* 4* 



4- 4- 



4* 
♦ 4* 



Teick s 



f A B, 1 
I Y Z, 3 



Remabk (Trick 3). —Y is justified in playing a forward 
game. He has four trumps (see pp. 114, 115), ace of the 
opponent's suit, and a fine heart suit : and his partner has 
declared strength in diamonds by choosing that suit for his 
original lead. 



Teick 5. 



Tkicks 



( AB, 2 
( Y Z, 3 



Trick 6. 



2^ 



IP ¥ 



Thicks 



[ AB, 2 
Y Z, 4 



Remaek (Trick 6). — Y is justified in playing a false card 
here, notwithstanding Gerreral Principle 12 (p. 105). The 
heart is a forced lead, and the card led (the ten) is almost 
certainly A- s best. Y's scheme is to take another round of 
trumps, and then to underplay in hearts (see p. 100) ; so 
he puts on the ace to deceive B as to the position of the 
king. 



WHIST. 



199 



Trick 7. 



♦ 



TRICKS I; f 



Trick 8. 



B ^ IP 



TRICKS I; 2 



Tricks 9 to 13. — Z leads the king of clubs, on whicli Y 
discards the two of diamonds. Z then leads the knave of 
hearts, on which Y puts the king ; the queen falls {see the 
hands below) ; Y brings in the hearts ; and 
YZ win five by cards. 



THE HANDS. 

(Ys hand is given above.) 



A's Haxd. 
Ace, Kg, 5 . ^ 
10,2. ... ^ 
Knv, 8, 7, 6, 5 ^ 
Ace, 8, 6 . . ^ 



B's Hand 

9, 8, 6 . . 
Qn, 7,4 . 

10, 9, 2 . . 
10,9,7,3 . 



Z's Hajo). 

Qn, 4, 2 . . , 
S:nv, 9, 3 . . 
E:g, Qn,4. . , 
Qn, Ejiv, 5, 4 , 



♦ 



A and B both play the hand badly. At Trick 6. A, in 
the face of an adverse trump lead and the command of his 
suit (clubs) against him, should lead the ace of diamonds 
to make the third trick and save the game. At Trick 8 B 
should put on his queen of hearts. He is fairly taken in 
^y Y's dark play at Trick 6 : but he ought not to have 
allowed himself to be so. He should have argued that Y, 
who has been playing a very strong game, would not be 
likely to put on ace second hand merely for the purpose 



200 



AVKIST. 



of getting the lead or of making sure of a trick. Further, 
A having declared weakness in hearts by leading a strength- 
ening ten, Z is sure to finesse if he has king, knave, or even 
king, nine. So B's best chance of making the queen is to 
put it on [see p. 101). 



HAND XVm. 

Defensive trump lead, and inlaying to the score. 
A's Haxd. 




Remakk. — (A defensive I 
trump lead [see p. 101.) 1 



WHIST. 



201 



Trick 3. 



Trick 4. 





Tricks | ^ f ^ 



Kemark (Trick 4).— A's finesse is unlucky. He is, how- 
ever, clearly justified in not parting with the command of 
trumps, as, even if the finesse does not succeed, he remains 
with the last trump, and will, in all probability, bring in his 
partner's diamonds. 



Trick 5. 



Trick 6. 



9 



Trick 



f AB, 3 
I Y Z, 2 




202 



WHIST. 



Trick 7. 




Tricks { f 4 



Trick 8. 




Tricks 



fAB, 4 
I Y Z, 4 



Tricks 9 to 13. — A leads the queen of diamonds, and 
then the seven, finding ]iis partner with the entire com- 
mand of diamonds {see B's hand below) ; and 

A B score three by cards and two by honors. 



THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above.) 
Y's Haot. B's Haxd. Z's Ha^^d. 

8, 7, 4, 3, 2 . ^ 10 .... 4^ Ace, Qn, 9, 6 . ♦ 

Kg, 10, 9, 4 . r 7, 6, 3 . . . ^ Ace, Knv, 5 . ¥ 

Knv, 7, 6 . . ^ Ace, Kg, 2 . 9, 8, 4 .... ♦ 

8 t A,Kg,Kv,4,3,2 # 10, 9, 6 . . . ^ 



It may be observed that Z loses the game by bad play at 
Trick 7. The fall of the cards in Tricks 5 and 6 shows that 
A has the queen of hearts, and Y the king. Z should there- 
fore, at Trick 7, lead the ace of spades to make the fourth 
trick, and then the heart, making the fifth trick and saving 
the game. 

At Trick 8, if Y leads a spade and Z does not finesse, the 
game may be saved. To finesse at that point would be 
very bad play, as the ace of spades makes the fifth trick. 
But Y's play at Trick 8, though unfortunate, is not wrong ; 



WHIST. 



203 



for Y cannot tell that Z lias the ace of spades ; Indeed, the 
presumption is that he has not, or he would have led it. Y 
properly plays to force the long trump, and to make his 
partner fourth player. 



HAND XIX. 

A well judged trump lead, though the adversary has 
called for trumps. 

B's Haxd. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY 

Trick 2. 



^ + 



Tricks { y 1; ? 




Tricks I j 



204 



AVHIST. 



Tbicb: 



m 



TEICKS{^|;1 

Remaeiv. — Z has called 

for trumps. 



Trick 4. 



Thicks 



A B. 1 
Y Z, 3 



Tkick 5. 




TEICKS{^|J 

EE:^rAEK.— The fall of the 
spades (see Tricks 3, 4, and 
5) shows that the three of 
the suit is in T's hand. 



Teick 6. 











^1 


4» 



4- 



4b 



Tkicks 



f A B, 2 
I Y Z, 4 



Remark. — It is seldom 
right to continue trumps 
when led by the opponents ; 
but this is an exceptional 

■ . case. B plays very Avell in 

drawing two trumps for one. as it is evident that if Y and 
Z make their trumps separately they must win the odd 
trick. 



"WHIST 



205 



Tbick ' 




Trick 9. 



B 



¥ ¥ 



Tricks { y 2' 4 



Trick 8. 



4. 4. 
4. 4, 



4.^4. 



4, 4. 
4- ^ 



¥ ¥ 



B 



TRICKS {^I'J 



Trick 10 




z iffl 



Tricks I; I 



Tricks 11 to 13.— Whatever Z leads, B makes ace, 
queen of hearts ; and 

AB win the odd trick. 



A's HajS^d. 

6 ♦ 

9, 6, 2 ... V 

Kg,Q,Kv,10,9,8 + 
Ace, 8^ 7 . . ♦ 



THE HANDS. 

(B's hand is given above.) 

Z's Hajo). 



T'S Haxd. 
Ace, 7, 3, 2 . 
7,5,4 . . . 
Ace . . . . 
Knv, 9, 5, 3, 2 



Qn, Knv, 10,9,8 ^ 
Kg, Knv, 3 . . ^ 
7, 6, 4 . . . . 4^ 
Kg, 4 ... . '4 



206 



WHIST. 



HAND XX. 

Returned lead, and refusing a force-. 





Score : 
AB, one ; YZ, love. 



Knave of spades turned up. 



Trick 1. 



THE PLAY, 

Trick 2. 




Tricks I y 1; J 




Tricks 



f AB, 2 
lYZ, 

Kemabk (Trick 2). — jN'ote the card returned by B, the 
seven. From this card it may be inferred that B remains 
with the five and no more. For, had he both five and king 
(the only ones remaining in), he would have returned the 
five (see p. 84). If no false cards have been played (as is 
most probable), B has the five of spades, and Y the king. 
A, therefore, does not continue the trump, but leaves the 
small spade in his partner's hand. 



WHIST. 



207 



Trick 3. 



Tricks 



Tbick 4. 




TRICKS {^^f;^ 



Trick 5. 



^'1 



4- 
4» 



♦ 
» 4 



TRICKS {IrfJ 



Trick 7. 



4. 4. 



» 4> 



1+ * 



+ 4- 



Tricks {|: I' J 



Trick 6. 



B 



m 



♦ 



♦ 
♦ ♦ 



TRICKS {^B, 6 



Trick 8. 



4- 

•5- 



«_sj 



THICKS {^f; I 



20S 



WHIST. 



Trick 9. 



A Ai 



^ AB, 6 
t Y Z, 3 



Trick 10. 




Tricks I; J 



Eemakk (Trick 9). — A knows B has at least two more 
clubs (see Tricks 7 and 8, and refer to Appendix A, p. 267). 
A, therefore, desires to leave the lead with Y, that he may 
go on with another club, and so clear B's suit. 



Trick 11- 



¥ ¥ 



¥ ¥ 



¥j 
¥ 



'¥~1F, 

^¥^ Z 
¥^¥ ^ 

¥ ¥1 



TRICKS {^f J 



Eemakk (Trick 11).--A 
leads his smallest heart, as 
he does not want to tempt 
B to finesse (see p. 130). B 
has ace, queen of hearts (see 
his hand below), but he does 
not finesse, as the ace of 
hearts, last club, and A's 
trump make every trick. 



A B win four by cards. 

THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above.) 



T's Haxd. 

Kg, 8, .3 . . . ♦ 

8, 5, 4 ... ¥ 
Ace, Kg, Qn . + 
Knv, 9, 6, 3 . 



B's Haxd. 
Qn, 7, 5 . . ♦ 
Ace, Qn . . 
10, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 + 
Kg, 10 ... 



Z's Haxd. 

Knv, 6 . . . 
Kg. Knv. 9.7. 2 
Knv. 8. 7 . . 
5, 4, 2 . . . 



♦ 
♦ 



WHIST. 



209 



HAND XXI. 

Refusing to overtrumj). 
A*s Hand. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



♦ ♦ 

♦ 4 



Tricks { y 1 



♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ 



4- + 



♦ 



♦♦♦ 
♦ ^4 



Tricks {yl; 2 



210 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 



Trick 4. 



m 



Trick 5. 



A A 



4. 4* 



9 y 



TRICKS (4 1; 1 



4 



Trick 6. 



4* 4 
4* 



4. 4. 
4.'5*4. 



TRICKS {^I'J 



♦ 



Tricks { y | 



TRICKS I^IJ 



Kemark (Trick 6). — A does not overtrump. This is 
the sort of coup for which no rule can be laid down in 
a book, as it depends entirely on the state of the game 
and the previous fall of the cards. A sees that his only 
chance of two by cards is for the remaining trumps to be 
divided, and for him to be able to get two rounds before he 
loses the command of hearts. If then his partner has ace, 
queen of spades, he may win the game even with his 
wretched hand. 



WHIST. 



211 



Trick 7. 



B 

1^ V 



THICKS {If J 



Trick 9. 




f AB, 5 
lY Z,4 



Trick 8. 





B 




























Trick 10. 




Tricks 11 to 13.— Z leads a heart, which A wins. A 
leads a spade, and finds his partner with ace, queen ; and 

AB win two by cards (which score before honors). 



THE HANDS. 
(A's hand is given above.) 
Ts Ha^o). I B's Hato). Z's Haxd. 

Kg, 9, 8 , . . ^ Ace,Q,Kv, 7,6,4 4 Knv, 7, 5, 4, 3 ▼ 

Qn, 9, 8 . . . t Ace, 6 . . . f Qn, 9 . . . * 

10, 8, 7, 4 . . ♦ Ace,Kg,Kv,6,5 ♦ Kg, Q,Kv, 10,6,5 ♦ 
9, 8, 7 . • • ^ 



212 



WHIST. 



HAND XXn. 

Refusing to overtrump. 

Z's HAIs^D. 




THE 



Tkick 1. 



rr 



Tricks 



[ AB, 1 
! Y Z, 



PLAY 

Thick 2. 



Y 












¥ 






¥ ¥ 








¥ 




¥ ¥ B 


A 








¥ 






¥ ¥ 
¥ 






Z 











4- 






4. 4. 










4. 4- 




Z 





TRICKS {4 1; J 



WHIST. 



213 



Trick 3. 



♦ 
♦ 



Y 



♦ ♦ 



Tkicks 



[ A B, 1 
I Y Z, 2 



Tbick 5. 




Tricks | y z' | 



Trick 7. 




Tricks 



[ A B, 5 
Y Z, 2 



Trick 4. 




TEICKsjf |'2 



Tkick 6. 



an 



4* ^ 



4- + 

•^ + B 



Tricks 



[ AB,4 
[Y Z, 2 



Trick 



4* 4- 



4 4 













4i 



TRICKS I I; I 



UEMAEK (Trick T).— It is clear from Y's putting the 
king on the three of hearts that A has ail the remaining- 



214 



WHIST. 



hearts. He has one other card, which, if there has been no 
false card played in clubs, must be the four of clubs (see 
fall of the club suit in Tricks 5 and 6). If Z parts with the 
queen of clubs while the four remains in A's hand, A will 
bring in the hearts, and make four by cards. Z, ver^' prop- 
erly therefore, refuses to overtrump. 



Tricks 9 to 13.— A leads a heart ; Z trumps it, and makes 
three tricks in diamonds ; his partner makes the last trick 
with the ace of spades {see Y's hand below) ; and 

TZ win the odd trick. 



THE HANDS. 



(Z's hand is given above.) 



A's Hand. 
7.4 3 . # 

Ace,Knv, 10, 9 

4, 3, 2 . . f 
Ace, Kg, 4 . ^ 



Y's Haxd. 
A, Kg, Kv, 8, 5 
Kg, Qn, 5 . . 
Knv, 10 . . 
9,4,2 . 



B's Hand. 
Qn,9, 4, 3 . . 4 

T V 

8, 7, 6, 3 . . . * 
Kg, 8, 7, 6 . . ♦ 



At Trick 6, A should not return the trump. The eight 
is certainly B*s best trump if he leads by rule, for he has 
neither the nine (turned up by Z), nor the ten (dropped by 
Y), and he cannot have led from queen, knave, eight, or he 
would have commenced with the queen. The best heart 
and best diamond being still against him, A should lead the 
heart in hopes of forcing his partner. If he does so, and B 
is overtrumped, A B win four by cards. If Z refuses to 
overtrump, and B continues with another round of trumps, 
A B equally win four by cards, as will clearly appear by so 
playing the hand. 



WHIST. 



215 



HAND XXIII. 

Refusing to overtrump. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 




TRICKS I; J 



4- J 



TRICKS {4 I 2 



216 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 




Trick 5- 



¥ 



¥ 

¥ 



Tricks ^ y 2' 2 
Eemaek. — From actual 
play ; but should not Y lead 
a trump ? 



Trick 7 




z 


























4. 4* 






4. 4. 




Y 




Tricks | y 1 



Trick 4. 




Tricks 1 I 



Trick 6. 




Trick 8. 



♦ ♦ 
♦ 

4 ♦ 



Y 



TRICKS {^B, 5 



WHIST. 



217 



Trick 9. 



4* 



Y 

Tricks 



AB, 5 
Y Z, 4 



Trick 10. 




Tracks \ 



KemaPvK (Trick 10).— Y's play in not overtrumping is 
very good. He counts the hand thus : to save the game Z 
must hold ace, queen, or ace, knave of spades ; his third 
card is evidently the remaining diamond. A has the nine 
of clubs (see fall of the club suit in Tricks 2, 7, and 9), and 
two trumps. B has two trumps, one being queen or knave 
(see Trick 9), and king,- knave of clubs. If the cards re- 
maining in each hand are placed face upwards on the table, 
and the uncertain cards, viz. , the nine, four, and three of 
trumps are given two to A, and one to B, it will be seen 
that, if Y overtrumps with the seven, he cannot make the 
requisite three tricks ; but that, if he leaves the lead with 
A, YZ make the remaining tricks. 

It may be added, that if, at Trick 10, A discards his club, 
and keeps his three little trumps together, leaving the trick 
to B, AB must win the odd trick if B leads a trump at Trick 
11 after trumping. This A might have reckoned. 



THB HANDS, 
(Y's hand is given above. ) 



A's Hand. 
4, 3, 2 ... 41 
Knv, 2 . . . ^ 

Ace, 9, 8, 7 .4* 
Kg, Knv, 10, 9 ♦ 



B's Haxd. 
Qn, 9, 8 . . 4^ 
Kg, 10, 8 . .1? 
Kg,Q,Kv,10,4,2* 
Ace. . . . f 



Z's Haxd. 
Ace, Knv, 10, 5 
Qn, 3 . . . . 

6 

8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 . 



218 



WHIST. 



HAND XXIV. 

Counting the hands, and consequent departure from 
rule. 

Y's Hand. 




WHIST. 



219 



Trick 3. 



Trick 4. 




Tricks {^B, 2 











































4- * 






Y 





TRICKS |;2 



Trick 5. 



4> 4> 



*^4- 



*4.* 

4» 
4-^4- 



Tricks 



f AB, 3 
[Y Z, 2 



Trick 7. 



y . ¥ 



V4 



¥ ¥ 

i¥ ¥. 



TRICKS I; I 



Trick 6. 



A 



TRICKS I ^I'J 



Thick 8. 




TRICKS {^B, 3 



220 



WHI5T. 



Kemark (Trick 7). — This is strong illustration of a 
case for departing from rule. Y can count two more 
trumps and at least three more spades in A's hand (see 
A's lead and the card he afterwards plays, Tricks 3 and 
6, and refer to Appendix A). It is clear that A can have 
at most two hearts ; consequently, if Y leads his tierce 
major in hearts, he must lose the game, as the opponents 
have two by honors. But, if Y can give his partner the 
lead, and Z has the entire command of clubs, or the win- 
ning club, and A makes the mistake of trumping it, YZmay 
make every trick, and win the game. 

Y would be right to play as he does even if A had led 
from only four spades, but the hand is given as it was 
played. 



Tricks 9 to 13.— Z continues to lead clubs (see his hand 
below), and, whether A passes or trumps, 

YZ score four by cards. 



THE HANDS. 

(Y's hand is given above.; 



A's Hand. 
Knv, 9, 5, 3, 2 4, 
8, 7 . . , . ^ 
Kg .... * 

Ace, Qn, 9, 6, 4 # 



B's Haxd. 

Kg,Qn,10,8,7 ^ 
Knv, 6, 5 . . ^ 
9, 4, 3 . . . ♦ 
Knv, 2 . . . 



Z's Hand. 
Ace, 6 ... 4 
9, 4, 3 ... f 
A,Q,kv,10,6,5,2 + 
5 ♦ 



WHIST. 



221 



HAND XXV. 



iSee ijeading from weakest suit, p. 128. 




222 



WHIST. 




Remark (Trick 3).— By the first discard Z shows his 
strong suit to be spades. In an ordinary hand Z might 
afterwards throw a diamond. But here Y must be strong 
in diamonds in order to save the game, and it is important 
for Z to keep the power of leading that suit more than 
once. 



Trick 6. 




Trick 6. 



Tricks I; 2 





















z 



THICKS J -^U 



WHIST. 



223 



Tbick 7. 



m 







TRicns 



f AB, 3 
I Y Z, 4 



Trick 8. 



4^ 



Teicks 



[AB,4 
[ YZ, 4 



Trick 9. 



Trick 10. 




4» 4- 



4* »: 



TRICKS {^f J 



Tricks 11 to 13.— A, with the lead, remains with the 
last trump and king, knave of diamonds. He (Trick 11) 
leads the trump ; but, whatever he plays, 
YZ win the odd trick. 



A's Hand. 
Kg . . . . ^ 

Kg, 4 . . . 

Kg,10,9,8,7,6,2 ^ 
Kg, Knv, 9 . # 



THE HANDS, 

(Z's hand is given above.) 



Y's Hand. 
Knv, 8, 5 . , 
Ace, 5, 2 . . f 
Qn, 4, 3 . . 4» 

Ace, Qn, 10, 2 ^ 



B's Hand. 
Qn, 9 ... 4, 
Knv, 10, 9,8, 
Ace, Knv . . 
7,6,4,3 . . ♦ 



224 



WHIST. 



A plays well throughout, but he cannot prevent the 
result. His lead of the trump at Trick 3 to show his 
strength, and to tell his partner to make one trick certain 
if he has the chance, is unlucky, as it puts the adversaries 
on the only tack for saving the game. 



See Treating long suits hke short ones, pp. 129-133 
B's Hand. 




Score ^ 
AB, one ; YZ, love. 

Kine of spades turned up. 




Trick 1. 




THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



Tricks 



f A B, 1 
i Y Z, 















Y 


Z 


















Tricks { |; I 



WHIST. 



225 



Trick 3. 




Tricks | y 1; q 



Trick 5. 



4- -^1 



V V Y 



Tricks 



[ AB, 5 
[YZ, 



Trick 7. 



4- + 



4- 



Tricks 



f AB, 
lY Z, 



Trick 4. 



4 4 



4>^» 



Tricks { 4 1'J 



Trick 6. 




Tricks { y z' 1 



Trick 8. 



❖ 4- 
4* 



1 ^ 



Tricks 



15 



/AB, 
i Y Z, 



WHIST. 



Trick 9. 



THICKS 14 



Trick 10. 











9 ♦ 






9 9 






♦ 




9 9 




9 9 










4- ^ 








^ * 4* 






9 


Y 


Z 






9 9 














•5. ^ 




9 












9 





Tricks 1 4"!' ^ 



Kemaek (Trick 9).— Deschapelles' Coup. B can count 
A's hand, three diamonds and two hearts, for the ten, nine 
of clubs are clearly with Y (see Tricks 7 and 8). B, there- 
fore, leads the king of hearts (seep. 130). If he makes the 
usual lead of a small heart, he wins a trick less as the cards 
happen to lie. 



Trick 11. 



♦ ♦ 



♦ ♦ 



9 

9 
9 



V 



B 

Tricks < 



AB, 6 
y Z, 5 



Trick 12. 




Trick 13. — A makes the king of diamonds ; and 
AB score two by cards and two by honors. 
If Y, at Trick 4, discards a heart, he saves the game. 
Nevertheless, his proper discard is the club {see pp. 103, 104). 



WHIST. 



227 



A's Hand. 
Kg, 7, 3 . . 
Qn, 7 . . . 
8,7,5 .. . 
Kg, 9, 5, 3, 2 . 



THE HANDS. 

(B's hand is given above.) 



Knv, 5 ... 4, 
Ace, 8, 6 . . ^ 
Ace, Ky, 10,9,2 4^ 
Ace, 10, 7 . .4 



Z's Hajh). 
9, 8, 6, 4 . . .4 
Knv, 10, 9 . . y 

Qn, 6, 4 . . . ♦ 
8, 6, 4 . . . .4 



HAND XXVII. 

See Refusing to win the second round of a suit, p. 131. 
Z's Hand. 




Thick 1. 



THE 



PLAY. 
Trick 2. 




TBICKsj^^' ^ 



[Y Z, 1 



z 



TRICKS {^IJ 



328 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 




TmcKsj^^l;^ 



Thick 4. 




Tricks { y 3 



Trick 5. 




Tricks { y |' 3 



Trick 6. 
# 



♦ 













4^ 



TRICKS 



Trick 7. 



I? 



♦ ♦ 



Z 

Tricks < 



A B, 3 
Y Z, 4 



Trick 8. 




Tricks I; I 



WHIST. 



229 



Trick 9. 




TRICKS I; ^ 



Trick 10. 



❖ 4> 



Teicks 



[ AB, 4 
I Y Z, 6 



Tricks 10 to 13.— Z brings in the diamonds; and 
yz win three by cards. 



THE HANDS. 

(Z's hand is given above. ) 



A's Hand. 
10, 2 .... 41 
Kg,Q,KvA5,2 Y 
Kg, 7, 4, 3 . . * 
Kg .... ♦ 



Y^s Hand. 
Ace, 8 . , . ^ 

9, 8, 4 . . 

10, 9, 7, 2 . 
Ace, 8, 4, 2 



♦ 



B's Hand. 

Qn, Knv, 5, 3 . 4^ 

10, 7, 3 . . . y 

Qn, Knv, 5 . . «^ 

Qn, 7, 5 . . . ^ 



At Trick 4, A having already shown his suit does not 
discard from it, as there is stiU a possibility of bringing it 
in (see pp. 103, 104), and his king of clubs is sufficiently 
protected even after the discard. 

If Z parts with the last trump at Trick 6, and leads dia- 
nionds, A, on the second round of diamonds, will unguard 
his king of clubs (knowing his partner to have a heart to 
lead him— see fall of the heart suit, Tricks 1, 4, and 5), will 
bring in all the hearts, and win the odd trick. 



230 



WHIST. 



HAND XXVin. 



See Refusing to win the second round of a suit, 
p. 131. 





Score : Love-all. 
Ten of hearts turned up. 



Trick 1. 



THE PLAT^. 

Trick 2. 



4 



♦ 
4 



[Mm 

B 



Tricks I; J 



Z 



♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ 



Tricks {yI,*! 



WHIST. 



231 



Tbick 3. 




TRICKS {^I'J 



Thick 5. 



WW 
1 



4- 4-1 



4- 4-1 



B 

Tricks 



V 



f AB, 1 
i Y Z, 4 



Trick 4. 




Remark (Trick 6). — B has next to no chance of bringing 
in the diamonds. He therefore plays to protect his short 
suits (see pp. 103, 104). 



Trick 7. 




Tricks 1^1:^ 



Trice 8 





A 












4* 






z 


4* 













4- 4- Y 



Tricks 



f AB, 
{ Y Z. 



232 



WHIST. 



Remakk (Trick 7). — B refuses to win this trick. The 
three of clubs is clearly in Z's hand (see fall of the club 
suit, Tricks 5 and 7), and the two long trumps. The re- 
maining clubs are evidently in Y's hand. If, therefore, B 
parts with the ace of clubs while Z has a club to lead, A B 
lose the game, unless A has the king of spades ; and if A 
has that card, B loses nothing by passing this trick, as Z, 
having only one more club, must hold three spades. 



Trick 9. 




Tricks | y z! 7 



Trick 10* 




AB, 3 
Y Z, 7 



Tricks 11 to 13— B (Trick 11) leads the last diamond, 
and forces Z. Z (Trick 12) has only spades to lead ; B 
makes ace, queen of spades ; and 

YZ score two by cards and two by honors. 



THE HANDS. 

(B's hand is given above.) 



A's Hand. 




Y's Hand. 


Z's Hand. 


10, 8, 7, 3 . . 


♦ 


9, 5, 2 . . .4 


Kg, 6, 4 . . . 


Knv, 9, 7 . . 




Kg, Qn . . . ^ 


Ace, 10, 6, 5, 3,:2 


10, 4 ... . 


* 


Qn, 9, 8, 6, 5 * 


Kg, Knv, 3 . 


Kg, 9, 7, 6 . . 




10,8,3. . . # 


4 



WHIST. 



233 



HAND XXXIX. 

See Declining to draw the losing trump, 
pp. 1*82, 133. 

A's Hand. 




234 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 



♦ 4 



4 
4 



♦ ♦ 



Trick 5. 



B 





























A 

Tricks ] 



AB, 1 

Y Z, 4 



Remark. — It is evident 
that Z's lead was from 
king, knave, ten, &c., and 
that B has no more hearts. 
Y returning the nine, and 
the two not falling, must 
have the two single, and 
the other hearts are with 
Z. 



Trick 4. 





B 






















♦ 4 
4 4 















Tricks {^Ij 2 



Trick 6. 



e 



^4 
4 4 
4 4 



4 4 

4^4 
4 4 



4 
4 

4 



Tricks 



[ A B, 2 
i Y Z, 4 



Remaek. — The case now 
arises contemplated at p. 133. 
A has the best trump and 
the lead ; Y the losing trump. 
Y also has one card of his 
partner's established suit 
(see Remark, Trick 5). A 
therefore (Trick 7) does not 
draw the trump. 



WHIST. 



235 



Tricr 7. 



1 Trick 8. 




TRICKS {^IJ 



Trick 9, 




TRICKS {^I'J 




TRICKS I; I 



TRICK 10. 




Tricks { y 1; ? 



Tricks 11 to 13.— Y has nothing but clubs to lead. A 
wins the three tricks ; and 

YZ win the odd trick. 

If, at Trick 7, A draws the trump, YZ win two by cards. 



Y's Hand 
Kg,7 . . 
Ace, 9, 2 . 
Kg, Qn, 4, 2 
Kg, 7, 6,4. 



THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above.) 



B's Hand. 
10, 8, 5, 2 . . 4 
8, 6 .... ^ 
Knv, 9, 8, 6, 3 + 
10, 2 . . . . ♦ 



Z's Hand. 
Ace, 4 .... 4^ 
Kg, Kv, 10, 4, 3 1^ 
10,7,5. . . . * 
Ace, 5, 3 . . . ♦ 



236 



\YHIST. 



HAND XXX. 

/S'ee Refusing to overtrump, pp. 134, 135. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 




Teick 2. 



4» 4* 



4. ^ 
B 



TRICK: 



f A B, 
\ Y Z, 



WHIST. 



237 



Trick 3. 



4. ^ 
4. 4. 



A 






































Y 


Z 












4. 4» 







Tricks { 4 z' 2 



Trick 4. 




AB, 2 



Trick 6. 



A 



4 Y 

4* 



B 

TRICKS 



Trick 7. 



^•1 



4. 4. 

4.*4. 



Tricks {I I; 5 



Trick 6. 




Tricks { y z* 2 



Trick 8. 



Z ♦ 4 

U ^1 



♦ 



TRICKS } A B, 5 



238 



WHIST. 



Trick 9. 




Tricks I y |' 3 



Trick 10. 



4> 



-♦ 



Tricks {^1;^ 



Kemaek (Trick 10).— A should probably liave played 
the winning diamond here (see his hand below). However, 
he luckily leads the spade. 

B does not overtrump for this reason : he can count A's 
hand to consist of the other spade and knave and another 
diamond (as, if A had led from queen, knave, and only one 
small diamond, he Tvould have commenced with the queen 
instead of the small one — see Trick 6), A, therefore, having 
no more trumps, B cannot possibly win two more tricks 
unless the queen of hearts is to his right. 



TRICK 11. 



♦ 4 














♦ ♦ 






♦ ♦ 








B 





Tricks 



f AB, 6 
I Y Z, 5 



Tricks 12 and 13.— Z 
leads a trump (he has only 
trumps in hand), and B 
makes ace and eight. 



A B win two by cards. 



WHIST. 



239 



THE HANDS. 

(B's hand is given above.) 



A's Hand. 



Kg,Knv,9,8,7 ^ 
Kg, 9, 6 . . . ^ 

1 * 

Qn, Knv, 9, 4 . ^ 



Y's Hand. 
6, 5, 4 . . .4^ 
Qn, 10, 3 . . ^ 

Ace,Qn,Knv,2 + 
Ace, 10, 8 . . ^ 



Z's Hand. 
Ace, 10, 3 . 
Knv, 7, 5, 4 
Kg, 10, 6, 3 
7,5 .. . 



HAND XXXI. 

See Throwing high cards to place the lead, pp. 135-139. 
A's Hand. 




Score : Love-all 
Five of clubs turned up. 




Trick 1. 



THE PIiAY. 

Thick 2. 



B 



4 ♦ 

I4> 41 



4 41 



4 

4 



4 
4 



TRICKS {4 1; J 

Remark. — B has no more 
spades. 




Tricks {y I; 2 



240 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 



4.^ 



•I- 







•I* 


•I- 




4- 



4- 



A 

Tricks ■ 



AB, 
Y Z, 3 



TRICK 5. 




Trick 7. 




Trick 4. 



r 



B 



4- * 



4» 4 

❖ 4 



Tricks {^f; J 



Trick 6. 




Trick 8. 





e 










♦ 


❖ ♦ 
















A 



Tricks | y z' 6 



Remark (Trick 8).— Well played by A. He sees that if 
he obtains the lead on the second round of diamonds he 



WHIST. 



241 



must continue the spade suit, a course demonstrably fatal 
to him, unless his partner has the queen of diamonds 
together with the long hearts (see fall of hearts. Trick 7). 
By throwing the king to the ace A avoids the lead, and 
saves the game if his partner has either queen or knave of 
diamonds (as may be seen by placing the cards), unless 
the adversaries continue the spade suit, when the game 
cannot be saved by any course of play. This clever coup 
occurred in actual play. 



Trtck 9. 

B 




Tricks 10 to 13.— B brings 
in the hearts, winning two 
more tricks ; A makes his 
trump ; and 



A 

TRICKS {^I J 



YZ score the odd trick and two by honors. 



Y's Haxd. 
Kg, 10, 8, 6, 5 . 
Kg, 10, 7 . . 
Qn, Knv, 10 . 
9, 6 ... . 



THE HANDS. 

(A's hand is given above 
B's Haxd. 

♦ 4 4 

^ Ace.Kv,9,4.3,2 V 

♦ Kg, 8 ... * 

♦ Qn, 8, 3, 2 . ♦ 

16 



Z's Haxd. 
Ace, Qn, 2 

8 

Ace, 9, 5, 2 . 
Ace, Kv, 10,7,5 



♦ 



242 



WHIST. 



HAND XXXn. 

See Throwing high cards to place the lead, 
pp. 135-139. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



3 



♦ ♦ 



♦ 

♦ 



Tricks I I' J 



Cm 



4> 



TRICKS I 



WHIST. 



243 



Trick 3. 




f A 2 
Tricks j y Z, i 



Trick 5. 



Tricks 1 2 



Trick 4. 



B 

* + 



♦ ♦ 

A 



4- 4- 



Tricks | y 2 
Eem ARK.— Y lias the knave 
of diamonds. 



Trick 6. 





















¥ 






L 4. 


2 


Y 


4. * 4. 






,4. 4. 






. 

4. 4. 




4« 






; 




4- 








4- 





Tricks { y |^ f 



Trick 7. 



Trick 8. 



4. 4. 



4» 
4. 4. 

4* 

4-^4» 



4. + 

4» . 4- 
4.^4. 
4. 4. 



THICKS {4^,2 




244 



WHIST. 



Trick 9. 




Trick 10. 



B 












¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 
¥^V 






z 









Tricks { y j 



Remaek (Trick 10). — A plays very well in putting on the 
ace. He wants two more tricks besides liis ace of hearts 
to save the game. The last trump and best diamond are 
against him. It is clear, therefore, if A has the lead after 
the second round of hearts (when he must lead a diamond), 
he loses the game. It is also clear that unless B has king, 
knave, and a small heart, the game is gone. 



trick 11. 



Trick 12. 




Tricks 



¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 



♦ ♦ 

A 

Tricks | 



A B, 5 
Y Z, 7 



YZ score two by cards and two by honors. 



WHIST. 



245 



THE HANDS. 



(A's hand is given above.) 



Y's Hand. 
Knv, 8, 7 . .41 
7, 6,4 . . 
Kg, 10, 5 . . ♦ 

Ace,Knv, 10, 5 ^ 



B's Hand. 
10, 9, 6, 3 . . ^ 
Kg, Knv, 5, 3,2 ^ 
Qn, 4 . . . + 
9, 8 .... ♦ 



Z's Hand. 
Kg, Qn, 5 . . . ^ 
10,9,8. . . . f 
Ace, Knv, 9, 7, 6 ^ 
3, 2 # 



At Trick 2, Y is in difficulties. His strong suit has been 
led by his right-hand adversary. Under these circum- 
stances, his best game (bad as it is) is to lead from his 
strongest weak suit. 

At Trick 6, Y's play in continuing the trump is open to 
criticism. His better lead seems to be knave of diamonds. 
Z wins his partner's ten of trumps in order to draw all the 
trumps. It is very bad play, for if Z passes the ten, and 
Y leads the knave of diamonds, the game is certain. This 
is an example of the very common error of winning part- 
ner's trick. It should seldom be done, and only if a posi- 
tive advantage can be well-nigh demonstrated from doing 
it. 

At Trick 11, the advantage of winning partner's trick — 
when judiciously done— is shown. B, seeing A's anxiety 
to get rid of the lead, rightly conjectures that A has two 
more diamonds. He therefore takes the only course to 
save the game, by winning his partner's queen. 



246 



WHIST. 



HAND XXXIII. 

{See Appendix A, pp. 267-276.) 
Z's Hand. 




Y 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 




Tricks 



A B, 
Y Z, 2 



Kemakk (Trick 2).— Z's better play would be to open the 
heart suit. 



247 



Tbick 3. 




Tricks \ y 2' 3 



Trick 4. 



♦ ♦ 



♦ ♦ 



♦ 
♦ 



^-4 



♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ 



TRICKS I; 2 



Trick 5. 









♦ ♦ 












♦ ♦ 
♦ 









Tricks { y z', 4 



Triok 7- 



4. 4* 



4. 4- 



4* 



Tricks I; I 



Trick 6= 




Tricks 1 4^1' I 



Trick 8. 




Tricks 



fAB, 3 
(yZ, 5 



348 



WHIST. 



Trick 9. 



¥ ¥ 



¥ 
¥ 
¥ 



Tricks I; 3 

Kemark. — It is now clear 
that Y led from five hearts 
originally (.see his lead. Trick 
3, and Appendix A, pp. 267- 
276). Consequently, Y Z 
have all the remaining hearts 
between them. 



Trick 10. 



^ 4 



4- 



AB, 3 
Y Z, 7 

Z can count 



Tricks 

Kemabk 
his partner' s hand, viz. , three 
more hearts (see Kemark, 
Trick 9, ) and one other card, 
either the deuce of diamonds 
(see the fall of the diamonds. 
Tricks 4 and 5, ) or a trump. 
If Y has the diamond, it 
matters not what Z leads, as B must then hold four trumps. 
Z therefore assumes that his partner has another trump, 
and plays to force him. 

But if Z could not tell that Y has three hearts, or, rather, 
could tell that he has only two (see Appendix A, p. 267), 
Z's proper lead at Trick 10 would be the ace of hearts. For 
then B must have a heart, and if Z leads a losing diamond^^ 
B discards his heart on it, and wins the game. 



THE HANDS. 

(Z's hand is given above.) 



A's Hai^d. 
Kg, Kv,8,4,3,2 4^ 
Knv . . . . y 
Ace, Kg . . 4» 
Qn, 9, 8, 7. . ^ 



Y's Hand, 
Ace, 5 . . 
Kg, 10,9,7,2 
7,6,4,3 . 
Ace. 10 . . 



B's Hanb. 
9, 7, 6 . . . , 

8, S 

Qn, Kv, 10, 5, 2 . 
Kg, 4, 2 . . , 



♦ 
♦ 



WHIST. 



249 



At Trick 6, B should play to force his partner in hearts 
instead of leading trumps. 



HAND XXXIV 

Echo of the Call (see Appendix B pp. 277, 278. 
Z's Hand. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



4 <^ 



TRICKS I' J 



4 ^ 



TRICKS I; 2 

Remakk (Trick 2). — Y has called for trumps. ' Z, having 
four trumps himself, commences to echo his partner's call 
(iSee Appendix B, pp. 277, 278). 



250 



WHIST. 



Trick 3 




Tricks | ?' ? 



[ Y Z, 1 

Eemark. — Z comiDletes 
the echo of the call. 



Trick 5. 




Tricks 



f AB, 3 
1 Y Z, 2 



Trick 4. 



¥ ¥ 



¥ ¥ 



Tricks I; ^ 

Remark. — ^Y, perceiving 
the echo, has no hesitation 
in trumping and leading 
trumps. 



Trick 6. 



¥ 
¥ 

¥ 



¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 
¥ ¥ 



Tricks I' 3 



Remark (Trick 6).— Notwithstanding that T is forced 
again, he perseveres with the trump, as he knows from Z's 
echo that he may safely lead another round. After this 
round Y knows that Z has the remaining trumps. 



251 



Trick 7. 




Trick 9. 



m 



Tricks { ^ \' \ 



Trick 8- 



♦ 
♦ 



♦ 



4> 



♦ ♦ 



4» 4- 



Tricks 



AB, 3 
Y Z, 5 



Trick 10. 



TRICKS I; ^ 




Tricks 



AB, 4 
T Z, 6 



TPvICKs 11 to 13. — T (Trick 11) leads a club ; Z trumps, 
and makes tlie remaining tricks ; and 

YZ score three by cards and two by honors. 



But for the echo the game might easily have been missed. 
At Trick 4, Y might have thought it prudent not to lead a 
trump after being forced, when, if he tries two rounds of 
diamonds, B makes a small trump, and the game is saved. 
A similar remark applies with increased force to Trick 6, 
after Y has been forced again. 



252 



WHIST. 



Kg, Qn, 10, 8 . ^ 
Ace, 2 . . , 
Qu, Knv, 3 . + 
Qn, Knv, 10, 8 4 



THE HANDS 
(Z's hand is given aboje 
Y's Ua^d. 
^ 4 .... 4, 
Kg,Q,Kv,10,7 ^ 
10, 5, 2 . . .41 
Ace, Kg, 3 . ^ 



B's Hand. 
Ace, Knv, 6 . ^ 
6, 4 .... ^ 
A, Kg, 9,8,7,6,4 4^ 
9 ' ♦ 



HAND XXXV. 

Leading losing trump, and Echo of the Call 
(see pp. 277, 278). 
Y's Hais^d. 




Trick 1. 



4 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



♦ ♦ 



Thicks {^I'J 



♦ ^ 



♦ ♦ 



Tricks | y 1; J 



WHIST. 



253 



Trick 3. 



'2. 














A , 


¥ V 




¥y¥ 
¥ ¥ 








¥ ¥ 

¥^¥j 


A 


R ♦ ♦ 
















¥ 








Y 

Tricks {y 2,' 1 





Trick 4. 



z 




¥ ¥ 












♦ 


9 




Y 





Tricks 2 



Remark (Trick 4).— Z, at Trick 3, played the five of 
hearts, and now trumps with the four. He had therefore at 
least four trumps originally (see Appendix B, pp. 277, 278). 



Trick 6. 




Trick 6. 



Y Z, 3 



4- 



Tricks}^ I; 2 



Trick 7. 



Trick 8. 



4. ^ 






4. 4. 




B 


4- 






A 


4. 4. 




4 ♦ 




4- 4-j 















4. 4. 

4» . 4«l 
4»'**4»i 



TRICKS 2 



4- 4* 




4. 4* 




4. 4. 




4.^4. 






*4.* 


¥ ¥ 




¥ ¥ 




Y 





254 



WHIST. 



Thick 9. 




Trick 10. 




TKicKs{^|;2 

Kemark (Trick 10). — ^Well played by T. He can count 
his partner's hand, viz., the eight of trumps {see Eemark, 
Trick 4, and the fall of the hearts, Tricks 3, 4, and 5), the 
last club, and a losing spade, as Z, having put on the ace 
of spades (Trick 9), cannot have the king. Y therefore 
trumps with the nine, and (Trick 11) leads the seven of 
hearts to put the lead in Z's hand. Z (Trick 12) leads the 
club, to which Y discards the ten of spades ; and 

Y Z win five by cards. 



THE HANDS. 



(Y's hand is given above.) 



Qn . . . . A 

Qn, 10 . . . ^ 

Qn, 10, 4,- 2 . * 

A,Qn,Kv, 9,8,5 



B's Hand. 

Kg, 7, 5,4, 3,2 
Ace .... 

9, 5, 3 . . . 

10, 4, 3 . . . 



t 



Z'S HA^sTD. 

Ace, 6 ... 4 

Kg, 8, 5, 4 . . ¥ 
Ace, Kg, 8, 7, 6 
7,6 ... . 



At Trick 4, B should have led a spade. A having shown 
at least five diamonds by leading ace, then knave (see p. 
84), the diamond is sure to be trumped, and it may force the 
weak trump hand, or may allow one adversary to discard 
and the oilier to trump. 



WHIST. 



255 



HAND XXXVI. 

Coup of compelling a discard, same in principle as 
the Vienna Coup. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 



TRicKsjf I; J 



z 
r 






























A 


B 














V ^ 
















Y 






Y 



Tricks 



JAB, 2 
lY Z,0 



256 



WHIST. 



Tbick 3. 



( 



♦ ♦ 

♦ ♦ 



2_ 



♦ ♦ 



Trick 5. 




Trick 7. 



4 
4 



Y 

Tricks < 



AB, 2 
Y Z, 1 



*** 












*** 




+ + 






*** 


n 





Tricks 



( AB, 3 
I Y Z, 2 



Trick 4. 



4> 



Tricks \W\ 



4. 4. 



4» 

4- 

4* 



* 4- 
4. 4. 

4' 4* 



Tricks {4 I; 2 



Trick 6. 




Trick 8. 



4. 
4 4 



Z 



[TV 



Tricks 



[ AB, 3 

I Y Z, 5 



WHIST. 



257 



Trick 9. 



z 












♦ ♦ 












A 














4» 4» 





TRICKS {^IJ 



Tkick 10. 



Tricks I ^ 



Eemark (Trick 9).— Well played by Y. He can count 
B's hand as follows : ten and two small diamonds (for Z 
dropped the knave, Trick 8, and A renounced) ; queen of 
spades (see Trick 6 — the lead of the king could only be 
from king, queen) ; and one other card, probably a small 
spade, for had B another heart he would most likely have 
continued his partner's original lead, instead of changing the 
suit. Y now leads a trump in hopes that B will discard the 
small spade, when Y will lead the seven of spades to throw 
the lead into B's hand, and B will be obliged to lead a dia- 
mond up to Y's tenace. 

B, however, discards a diamond. Y continues his tactics 
(see Trick 10), leading another trump. This compels an- 
other discard from B. If B discards the small spade, Y 
leads the losing spade ; if B discards another diamond, Y 
establishes the diamonds, and in either case wins the game. 
This fine coup occurred in actual play. 



Tricks 11 to 13.— Y (Trick 11) leads the spade. B is 
obhged (Trick 12) to lead a diamond ; and 



Y-Z score three by cards and two by honors. 



258 



WHIST. 



A's Haxd. 
Knv, 9, 8, 4 . ^ 
Qn, 10, 9, 8, 2 f 
10, 8, 6 . . . cfe 
9 4 



THE HANDS, 

s hand is given ab* 

Kg, Qn, 2. , ^ 
Ace, Kg . . ^ 
Qn, 9 . . . + 

10, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3 4 



-e.) 

Z's Hand. 

Ace, 10, 6, 6 . ^ 

Knv, 7, 4, 3 . ^ 

Kg, 7, 4 . . * 

Knv, 2 . . . ♦ 



At Trick 10, B should notice that he must lose the game 
if he retains the queen of spades. His only chance of 
saving tlie game here is to discard the queen of spades, in 
hopes of finding his partner with two tricks in spades, or 
with a trick in spades and hearts. If A has not these 
cards, the game is lost. 



WHIST. 



259 



HAND XXXVn 

Grand Coup (see pp. 139-143). 
B's Haxd. 




Trick 1. 



THE PLAY. 

Trick 2. 




2_i 



B 



Tricks I^B, 2 



260 



WHIST. 



Trick 3. 



♦ 
♦ 
♦ 



2_i 



B 

Tricks 



AB,2 
Y Z. 1 



Trick 5. 




Tricks}^ I; 2 



Trick 4. 



r 



# 4 



♦ ♦ 



B 



Tricks {|: I; 2 



Trick 6. 



A 












♦ ♦ 













Tricks {|: I' ^ 



Trick 7. 



Trick 8. 




4- ❖ 



B 



tricks I; ^ 

Remark.— The fall of the 

king shows that the remain- 
ing clubs are in Y's hand. 



A B, 5 
Y z, 3 



Tricks | 

Remark. — Well played by 
B. All the hearts are out ; 
the remaining diamonds are 
in Z^s hand {see fall of the 



WHIST. 



261 



diamonds, Tricks 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7), and all the clubs are 
in Y's hand. Y must therefore have three trumps and 
two spades. If B discards a spade to this trick, he cannot 
avoid leading trumps twice up to Y. In thav case, Y will 
make two tricks in trumps, saving the game, as will be 
apparent by so playing the cards. The result is otherwise 
if B trumps his partner's best heart. He can then lead out 
ace and king of spades, to which Y must follow suit ; and 
by continuing with the six of clubs (the nine, eight, and 
three are in against him), B secures the tenace, and wins 
the game. 



Tricks 9 to 13. — B (Tricks 9 and 10) leads spades, and 
(Trick 11) the six of clubs. B makes the last two tricks, 
and 

AB score three by cards and two by honors. 



THE HANDS. 

(B's hand is given above. 



A's Hand. 
9,5,4,3,2 . ^ 
Ace,Kg,Q, 10,2 f 
Kg .... 4; 

10, 6 .... 



Y's Hand. 
Qn, 6 . . . 4 
Knv, 9, 8, 5, 3 f 
9, 8, 3, 2 . . * 
Ace, 9 . . . ♦ 



Z's Hand. 

Knv, 10, 8, 7 . 4b 
7, 4 .... f 
Ace, 10 . . . tf» 
Qn, Knv, 8, 7,2 ♦ 



262 



WHIST. 



HAND XXXVm. 

Grand Coup (see pp. 139-143). 



Z's Hand. 




Trick 1. 



THE 



play: 

Trick 2. 




Tricks 



f AB,1 
{ Y Z,0 



1^ ^ 



TEroKs{AB, 2 



WHIST. 



263 



Thick 3. 



]9 y 



Tricks 



f AB, 3 
1 Y Z, 



Trick 4. 




TRICKS I; J 



Remark (Trick 3). — A and Y have no more trumps, and 
Z knows that the queen, ten are in B's hand. 



Trick 5. 



4* 



2 

Tricks ^ 



A B, 5 
Y Z, 



Trick 7. 




Trick 6. 



4> ^ 



4» 


4* 











TRICKS {AB 6 



Trick 8. 



♦ 



w 

m 



4, 



Tricks 1^1' J 



TKICKsjAB.6 



264 



WHIST. 



Remark (Trick 8). — Z throws the king of spades instead 
of the three for this reason. If Z has the lead at the tenth 
triclv, he must lose a trick in trumps, and the game. The 

ng of spades is useless to Z, as he must lose the game un- 
less Y has the ace of spades ; and Z fears, if he retains the 
king, that his partner may refrain from winning the tenth 
trick. 

Of course, if Z had the ace of spades instead of the king, 
he would similarly throw the ace at Trick 8, as it is evident 
that in that case the game is lost unless Y has the king of 
spades. 

Thick 9. ^ Thick 10. 





4 ^ 












^4^ 














4^4 
4 4 










4 t 








^ 4 


♦ 4 






4 ' ^ 


B 


A 


4 














* 4 
4 - 4 






4 4 




4 












4 
4 





TRICKS I; « 
Remark.— The Grand Coup. 



Tkick 11. 



4 4 



4 4 



.J. ^ 
4'5*^, 



Tricks { y 1) 5 



Tricks {^I'J 



Tricks 12 and 13. — Z 
makes his two trumps ; and 



YZ win the odd trick. 



WHIST. 



265 



THE HANDS. 

(Z's hand is given above. ) 



A's Hand. 
9, 7, 5, 4 . .4 

9, 7 .... ^ 
Qn, 6 . . . * 

10, 7, 6, 4, 2 . ^ 



Y's Hand. 
Ace, Knv, 6 . 4^ 
5, 4 .... f 
4, 3, 2 ... 4 

Qn, Knv, 9,8,5 # 



B's Hand. 
Qn, 10, 8 ... 4^ 

Ace, Qn, 10, 6 . 
Ace, Kg, Knv, 8 •}» 
Ace, 3 .... V 



It may be remarked that B refuses to trump several win- 
ning cards. He refrains advisedly. Knowing his left-hand 
adversary to have three more trumps, he expects that a 
trump must be led up to the queen, ten at Trick 11, and 
that he must then make the odd trick. 



APPENDIX A. 



ON THE CARD TO LEAD FROM SUITS OF 
FIVE OR MORE. 

All Whist players are aware of the importance of 
affording information as to the unplayed cards they 
hold by following certain rules of play. Some of 
these rules are purely conventional — i.e,, it matters 
not which of several cards is played, so far as trick- 
making is concerned ; but one card is frequently 
selected in preference to another for the simple pur- 
pose of giving information. The selection, however, 
is not an arbitrary one ; it is made in conformity with 
the rules of play that in similar cases might affect 
trick-making, and, by analogy, the principle is ex- 
tended to other cases {see p. 108, last paragraph). 

A familiar instance of extension of principle is in 
the case of returned leads. All players know that, 
with only two cards remaining of a suit previously 
led once, the player returning the lead selects the 
highest of the two remaining cards. The original 
reason for this is that, inasmuch as three cards in a 
suit are less than the average, the suit is weak ; and 
the weak suit is sacrificed in the endeavor to strength- 
en partner. 



368 



WHIST. 



If you have two small cards remaining — say the 
trey and the deuce — it is not pretended that the 
return of the trey strengthens your partner in the 
least. But by adhering to the rule, by extending the 
principle to all cards, high or low, you enable a good 
partner to calculate how many you have left of the 
suit. The original reason for returning the high card 
is lost sight of, and, in such a case, the return of the 
trey is a mere convention. 

The Author feels bound to go thus far into con- 
ventional rules because he is about to propose a con- 
ventional method of leading from suits containing 
five or more cards ; and he wishes to show how far 
conventions are allowable at Whist, so as not to be 
met with the objection that his proposed method of 
leading is a mere arbitrary signal. In order to ex- 
plain whence it is deduced, it will be necessary to 
enter at length into leads from intermediate sequences 
{see p. 72). 

The general rule for leading from suits which con- 
tain no cards in sequence is to lead the lowest card, 
with the exception of ace and four or more small 
ones. From suits containing cards in sequence head- 
ing the suit, such as ace, king ; king, queen ; queen, 
knave, ten, the rule is to lead one of the sequence. 

From suits containing a sequence that does not 
head the suit, the lowest card is led. The only 
generally admitted exception is in the case of king, 
knave, ten, and a small card or cards, from which 
the ten, the lowest of the intermediate cards in 
sequence, is led. So also from king, knave, ten, 
nine, &c., the nifie is led ; and from king, knave, ten, 
nine, eight, &;c., the eight. 



WSlST. 



269 



It has always surprised the writer to find that this 
mode of leading is confined to this particular se- 
quence, instead of being extended to lower interme- 
diate sequences. Thus, from king, ten, nine, eight, 
deuce, or from queen, ten, nine, eight, deuce, the 
eight seems the best card to lead, but the deuce is 
generally led. And, as no line can be drawn which 
will tell us where the trick-making advantage of 
leading from the sequence is to stop, the principle 
should be extended to all intermediate sequences 
when the suit contains at least five cards. This 
proviso is necessary, as, with the exception of the 
king, knave, ten, and one small card, there is no 
advantage in leading a middle card from suits of 
four cards only. 

It has already been seen that extensions of prin- 
ciple obtain in similar cases, notoriously in the case 
of returned leads ; therefore there can be no theoreti- 
cal objection to pursuing the plan here advocated. 
But some players say there is a practical disadvan- 
tage. By leading the intermediate card you simulate 
a lead from a weak suit {see p. 77) ; and the disad- 
vantage of concealing your strength for the moment, 
more than counterbalances the advantage your part- 
ner may subsequently derive when the true nature of 
the lead becomes evident. 

But w^hy, it may be asked, if your partner is not 
deceived by the lead of eight, from king, knave, ten, 
nine, eight, and a small one, should he be deceived 
by the lead of the eight from king, ten, nine, eight, 
and a small one ? 

The reply is on the surface. Whist players are 
accustomed to the one lead, and not to the other ; 



270 



WHIST. 



and it is by no means easy to get people out of a 
groove in which they and their predecessors have xn^ 
for over a hundred years. 

Now there is a very good reason why the lead of 
the intermediate card ought not to deceive anyone 
who has confidence in his partner. It is this : The 
original lead of a good player is from his strongest 
suit. 

If, then, this good player commences with an eight, 
and in the second round drops a smaller card, the 
eight cannot by the hypothesis be the best card of 
his suit, for he never chose such a suit to lead from 
originally during his career as a Whist player. 
What, then, can be the meaning of his lead ? It may 
be (and would now be understood to be) from king, 
knave, ten, nine, eight, and a small card. It might 
equally be, if Whist players were less conservative, 
from king, ten, nine, eight, and a small card, or from 
queen, ten, nine, eight, and a small card ; a protect- 
ive card, lest the leader's partner should turn out to 
be very weak in the suit. 

It is objected to this argument that the advantage, 
quoad trick-making, when you lead from a small 
intermediate card is next to nothing. This is true ; 
but the lead of the intermediate card gives a great 
advantage to players who practise and understand it, 
inasmuch as, with the exception of the recognized 
king, knave, ten lead, such a lead can only he made 
from a suit of five cards at least. Your partner is 
thus informed, probably on the second round, of the 
number of cards of that suit remaining in your hand. 
The original reason of the rule — to prevent a verv 
small card from winning the first trick — is lost dght 



WHIST. 



271 



of ; and the rule is extended to all sequences, whether 
it improves the chance of trick-making or not, in 
order to enable your partner to count your hand. 
It need not be argued here that this is an admissible 
convention, as the subject has already been fully 
debated. 

, Every player (in the philosophical sense of the 
word) knows the advantages that accrue from being 
able to count the three cards in hand after an orig- 
inal lead of ace and a small one (an original lead be 
it observed, not a forced lead) ; and also the advan- 
tages derived from leading the knave from king, 
queen, knave, and more than one small one ; the 
king from king, queen, knave, and only one small 
one. Indeed, no one will deny the importance of 
being able to tell his partner the number of cards he 
holds in a given suit, especially in a strong suit. 
This can be done by extending the original lead of 
the lowest card but one to all suits of more than four 
cards 1 irrespective of their containing an interme- 
diate sequence. 

Holding an intermediate sequence, as, for instance, 
knave, seven, six, five, two, it has already been ar- 
gued that the five is the most advantageous card to 
lead. Now, suppose the suit to be knave, seven, six, 
five, four, the five is equally the card that conveys 
the most information, although not the lowest of an 
intermediate sequence ; so with knave, seven, six, 
three, two, the three is similarly the card that con- 
veys the most information. There is no sequence 
here, but by first leading the three (it being an orig- 
inal lead), and then dropping the two, you tell your 
Dartner that you have at least three more cards in 



272 



wmsT. 



the suit. This seems to be a legitimate extension of 
principle. 

But, as this may be disputed, it may be as well to 
re-state the argument. In the parallel case of re- 
turned leads the card chosen is the one which ena- 
bles your partner to count your hand. The original 
rule applied only to strengthening cards ; but as in 
practice it has been found that adhering to the rule 
— even though the original reason for it is lost — ena- 
bles a good player to count the remaining cards, a 
uniform method has been adopted in all cases, 
whether the card returned strengthens your partner's 
hand or not. 

Now, if a player, when he holds a strong suit con- 
taining an intermediate sequence of three cards, 
leads the lowest but one of the suit, and, in other 
cases, the lowest, players would soon perceive that 
the former lead informs them that their partner held 
at least five of the suit originally ; the latter lead 
that he held but four. By a train of reasoning, sim- 
ilar to that which has already settled the right card 
to lead in the case of returned leads, players, in order 
to enable their partners to count their hands, would 
naturally extend the rule to all suits of five or more 
cards, whether containing a sequence or not. The 
original reason for the rule (as in the parallel case 
of turned leads) no longer applies; and the lowest 
card but one is selected for the sole purpose of 
convey iiig information* It would be absurd to stoij 
at small intermediate sequences, and to say, for ex- 
ample, that from ten, six, five, four, two, the four 
may legitimately be led to convey information ; but 
that from ten, six five, three, two, the three may not 



WHIST. 



273 



be led for the same purpose, because in the latter case 
there is no sequence. 

It should not be overlooked that the negative ad- 
vantage to be derived from this system of leading is 
almost as great as the positive advantage. If it is 
admitted that when you lead the lowest but one of 
your strong suit you have at least five, and that when 
you lead the lowest you have not five of it, it is a 
moral certainty when you lead the lowest that you 
have led from a suit of four exactly. Thus your hand 
can be counted in another way. 

The rule, then, that the Author proposes as the 
result of the previous arguments is : begin with the 
lowest hut one of the suit you lead originally if it 
contains more than four cards. Suits of ace and four 
small ones ; ace, king, and small ones ; king, queen, 
and small ones ; king, knave, ten, and one or more 
small ones not in sequence with the ten ; and one or 
two other well-known leads from commanding 
strength — being of course excepted. There is also 
another exception, viz., in the case of six-card suits. 
From such a suit as queen, ten, nine, eight, three, 
two, the eight is the best card to lead quoad trick- 
making, and not the small one. Here the lowest but 
two is led. This card, however, would be led in the 
same way as the ten from king, knave, ten, &c., by 
anyone who adopts the intermediate sequence lead ; 
and it would inform partner just as much as the lead 
of the three that the suit led from contains five cards 
at least. 

Information as to the number of trumps you hold 
can be similarly communicated by trumping with 
the lowest but one, and then leading the lowest. 
Thus, you have ace, queen, eight, six, three of trumps, 

18 



274 



>VHIST. 



and are forced. You trump with the six, and lead 
the three, when your partner knows that you hold 
at least three more trumps. 

The rule is so simple that anyone can practise it. 
It must be borne in mind that the rule only applies 
to original and not to forced leads ; and that it can 
only be advantageously practised by players who 
have confidence in each other, so far as to feel cer- 
tain that the original lead of each partner is from his 
strongest suit. 

Frequent practice for some two years with good 
players, who have adopted this mode of leading 
from five-card suits, has fully convinced the Author 
of the soundness of the propositions contained in this 
Appendix, and of the advantage of adopting the 
practice here recommended. 

The only case in which a mistake is possible is 
when trumps are led originally from numerically 
weak trumps, with very strong cards in all the plain 
suits, or in desperation. But as in both these cases 
partner's game is nearly always to go on with trumps 
at all hazards, his uncertainty as to the real charac- 
ter of the lead is of but small consequence. 

Mr. Clay, in his "Treatise on Whist," has devoted 
a chapter to advocating a contrary view of leads 
from intermediate sequences. As the opinions of 
that great player are certain to influence a very large 
number of persons, the Author has obtained per- 
mission to state that Mr. Clay, on reading the fore- 
going pages (printed for private circulation among 
members of the Portland and other Clubs), said to 
the Author, **You have convinced me. When I 
play with you at the Portland, I shall adopt your 



WHIST. 



275 



system." And Mr. Clay did afterwards at the Port- 
land, to the Author's certain knowledge, use this 
mode of leading from suits of five cards. 



RECAPITULATION. 

1. One card is often selected in preference to 
another for the sole purpose of affording information 
and especially of enabling your partner to count 
your hand, provided always that such selection har- 
monizes with the play which would be naturally 
adopted in similar cases. 

2. The card chosen conveys information in these 
cases in consequence of a conventional understand- 
ing between players generally, a rule being adhered 
to, notwithstanding that the reason of it no longer 
exists, because, by practising a uniform system, part- 
ner is informed as to the contents of your hand. 

3. The lead of the lowest of an intermediate se- 
quence being admitted to be correct in some cases, 
as conducing to trick-making, the lead of the lowest 
of an intermediate sequence is permissible as a con- 
ventional rule — whether such lead conduces to trick- 
making or not — in order to impart information, and 
to enable partner to count your hand. 

4. As, by leading the lowest but one of a suit 
which contains an intermediate sequence, partner is 
enabled to determine whether the original lead is 



27b 



WHIST. 



from a suit of four or of more than four cards, the 
rule of leading the lowest but one may be still further 
extended to all suits of more than four cards, whether 
they contain intermediate sequences or not, for the 
purpose of conveying information as to the number 
of cards originally held in the suit. 

For an illustration, see Hand XXXIII. 



APPENDIX B. 



THE ECHO OF THE CALL. 

The more advanced players of the present day have 
adopted an extension of the call for trumps {see pp. 
115-118), which has received the name of the Echo, 
Echoing a call consists in asking for trumps in re- 
sponse to your partner's ask, when, but for his 
demand, you would not have called. 

The strength which is usually regarded as the mini- 
mum that justifies an original call is four trumps, 
two being honors; or five trumps, one being an 
honor. Late in a hand, when you have already had 
the opportunity of calhng and have not called, you 
would occasionally be justified in asking with less 
strength, the fall of the cards showing you that a 
trump lead is imperatively necessary. This subse- 
quent call has not the same force as an original call, 
and does not necessarily imply such great strength in 
trumxDS. 

Now, suppose your partner to have called for 
trumps originally, and that you have had the chance 
of making an original call and have not availed your- 
self of it. After perceiving your partner's call, you 
also call. What does your call mean? It means 

(277) 



278 



WHIST. 



that, though you were not strong enough to dictate a 
trump lead ab initio, you are strong^ enough to help 
your partner, and you would be very glad to see 
trumps out. 

Numerical strength is of more importance in this 
case than commanding strength. It has therefore 
been laid down as a rule, that you should not echo a 
call unless you have at least four trumps. With four 
trumps, however small, you should echo. 

Similarly, if your partner leads trumps, and you 
have four or more, you should call in the trump suit, 
or at the first opportunity. 

On the same principle you should echo a call or a 
trump lead, when you hold four trumps, even if you 
have not previously declined the opportunity of call- 
ing. Here your partner cannot tell whether your 
card is an original or an echoing one ; but he is, at 
all events, informed that you have numerical strength 
in trumps. 

The advantages of the echo are manifold. Your 
partner being strong in trumps may hesitate to take 
a force, but your echo enables him to do so without 
fear, and to persevere with the trump lead. Or, your 
partner may be in doubt after the second round of 
trumps as to the policy of playing a third. But if 
he can count two more trumps in your hand he will 
be directed. Thus : eight are out, your partner has 
three more ; you have echoed. He will know that 
the other two are in your hand, and will not draw 
two for none, as, without the echo, he might do. 

The negative advantage of the echo should not be 
overlooked. Thus: to take the same case of eight 
trumps being out, and the leader with three more 



WHIST. 



270 



trumps. You (his partner) have had the chance of 
sounding an echo, but have not done so. The leader 
knows that you have not two of the remaining 
trumps, and he will regulate his game accordingly. 

For illustrations of these remarks, see Hands 
XXXIV. and XXXV. 




CARD ESSAYS, 
CLAY'S DECISIONS, 

AND 

CARD-TABLE TALK. 

BY 



"CAVENDISH, " 

Author of "The Laws and Principles of Whist, tfcc, itc. 




A 



TO 

EDWARD TAVENER FOSTER 

THIS BOOK 

IS 

CORDIALLY DEDICATED, 

BY 

His Ses'ceee Feiexd 

THE AUTHOR. 



PREFACE. 



In the present volume the Author has reproduced 
(with corrections and numerous augmentations), 
some miscellaneous papers on subjects connected with 
Cards, which have hitherto been buried in back 
numbers of periodicals. 

Also Decisions by the late Mr. Clay, to which some 
are added that have not been previously pubhshed. 

The concluding portion of the volume consists of 
notes of events which have come within the Author's 
personal experience, at Cards or in connection with 
Card-players, during the last twenty years. 

The matters related as anecdotes have all actually 
happened. None have been manufactured for the 
sake of effect. It is possible that some of the char- 
acters may be recognized by a hmited circle ; but the 
Author has been careful not to name names," ex- 
cept where the persons referred to are beyond the 
pale of offence or injury. 

An apology should, perhaps, be tendered for the 
number of capital I's " expended in the latter part 
of the volume. An attempt has been made to keep 
them down ; but it has been found impossible to ex- 
clude them when relating personal experiences. 

(3^ 



4 PREFACE. 



A word as to the frontispiece. The idea of t)ub- 
lishing his counterfeit presentment occurred to the 
Author recently, on discovering that a hideous full- 
page caricature of himself (purporting to be a por- 
trait) had appeared in a London periodical. 



PoBTLAiTD Club, August, 1879. 



CONTENTS. 



CARD ESSAYS:— PAas. 

Whist versus Chess 7 

On the Moeality of Card-Playing?. . . 18 
On the Origin and Development of Cards 

AND Card-Games 43 

Bibliography 70 

On the Etymology of Whist. ... 72 
Duties on Playing-Cards . . . . 83 

MoLiERE ON Piquet 199 

The Duffer's Whist Maxims. , . .106 

DECISIONS OF THE LATE MR. CLAY . . Ill 

CARD-TABLE TALK . . . . . .139 



CAED ESSAYS. 



WHIST versus CHESS. 



Afl for the Chesse, I think it over-fond, because it is too over-wise 
and philosophicke a folly.'* — Basilicon Doron. 

What Game indeed, of all the nurn'rons list, 
In point of beauty, can compare to Whist.'* 
— Whisty a Poem in twelve Cantos^ 

by Alexa^^deb Thomsoi^, Canto v., 1. 27, 28. 



Whist and Chess have often been compared ; 
generally to the disadvantage of the former. The 
votaries of Caissa are loth to admit that any other 
indoor game will bear comparison with Chess. Let 
us see what can be said in favor of Whist. 

It will be admitted that some games possess a higher 
generic character than others, just as, in hterature, 
epics rank above ballads. Both Whist and Chess 
are placed, by common consent, so to speak, in the 
epic class, and probably, as regards sedentary games, 
those two only. If, then, we inquire what game it is 
that, in largeness of conception and in fitness for pur- 
poses of recreation, transcends every other, the reply 
will be found by comparing the claims of Whist and 
Chess. 

First, as to the two intellectual faculties brought 
into exercise by the two games. Chess may be de- 

^7) 



8 



CARD ESSAYS. 



scribed as a series of analytical problems, in which the 
business of the player having the move is to determine 
his correct play from certain data. One mental power 
only then is requisite for the chess-player, viz. : the 
power of analysis. It was the possession of this fac- 
ulty in unusual perfection which enabled Deschapelles 
to beat the best players of his time after four days' 
practice, and by what he called a sudden impulse to 
stamp Chess upon his brain. I mastered the moves," 
he said, * Splayed with Bernard who had succeeded 
Philidor, as the monarch of the board. I lost the 
first day, and the second and third ; but I beat 
him even-handed on the fourth, since when I have 
never either advanced or receded. To me, Chess has 
been a single idea, which, once acquired, cannot be 
displaced from its throne, provided the intellect re- 
mains unimpaired." 

There is no similar experience of Whist having 
been suddenly learnt, though there might be of 
Double Dummy, which, like Chess, presents a definite 
problem for solution. No man, not even Descha- 
pelles himself (the finest Whist player, according to 
Clay, the world has ever seen), could learn to play 
Whist tolerably in four days. Deschapelles wrote on 
this point — ' * A man may play Whist for several weeks. 
He will then find it is necessary for him to apply his 
knowledge for three or four years before he discovers 
how difficult a game it is." — Traite dii ^Whiste, frag- 
ment dtt Chapitre XV, And the reason is not far to 
seek. In order thoroughly to investigate the theory, 
and to arrive at the principles of Whist, mathematics 
and careful reasoning have to be employed. The 
theory, indeed, may now be learnt readily enough 



CARD ESSAYS. 



9 



from books ; but the practice, to be of the first order, 
involves a great variety of accomplishments. 

To apply the theory of Whist successfully, the player 
must note the peculiarities of partners and of oppo- 
nents ; that is, he must study human nature. He 
must use observation, memory, inference, and judg- 
ment in such a way as to enable himself to trace ap- 
pearances to their true origin. He must be by turns 
cautious and bold. He must exercise watchfulness 
and tact. He must shrewdly shield himself against 
deception. He must level well-weighed arguments 
at every card that falls. And in short, as Dr. Pole 
well observes, he must bring to bear on the game 

such a general course of thought and action as must 
be dictated by competent and well-trained mental 
powers." 

Deschapelles calls Chess a ''single idea," in the 
sense of simple {simplex) ; Whist may, in a similar 
sense, be regarded as a compound idea. 

Now, as to the variety of Whist and Chess. It is 
hardly necessary to state that great variety is essen- 
tial to scientific games, to prevent exhaustion by sys- 
tematic analysis. Variety is also necessary to popu- 
lar games, in order to check repetition, and to prevent 
the interest they excite from flagging. In variety, 
both Whist and Chess are practically infinite. The 
possible combinations in both games are, humanly 
speaking, inexhaustible. Theoretically, the whole 
progress of a perfect game at Chess is dependent on 
the move made by the first player. And there being 
twenty moves open to him, the number of absolutely 
perfect games that might be played is twenty. But 
even of these twenty games it cannot be contended 



10 



CARD ESSAYS. 



that all would be of equal excellence, because some 
one or two of the original twenty moves ought to be 
superior to all the others. Practically, Chess is not 
thus limited, because when the analytical power of one 
player fails to conduct him to the perfect move, a 
variation is introduced, on which the opponent has in 
turn to exert his powers of analysis, and so on. 
Hence, without seeking to deny that Chess is, for 
practical purposes, inexhaustible, it is still the fact 
that the great variety of Chess is not inherent in the 
game itself, but is due to imperfections in the 
analytical skill of the antagonists. As far as the ex- 
ercise of judgment based on probabilities is con- 
cerned, Chess is valueless ; because no Chess player 
would hazard a move other than the best suggested 
by his analytical skill, on the chance of the adver- 
sary's failing to take advantage of his error. Reduc- 
tion of variety within narrow bounds is consequently 
the ultimate limit to which the practice of Chess ap- 
proaches, in proportion as the analytical skill of the 
players increases. 

Though at Whist hands may be grouped so as to 
admit the application of certain principles of play to 
certain sets, no exhaustive demonstration of these 
principles is possible. I^o 'proof can be given. The 
student has frequently to be satisfied if the reasons 
in favor of a certain line of play appear weighty in 
themselves, and if none weightier can be suggested 
in support of a contrary course ; also, he has often 
to be contented with the assurance that particular 
methods of play, having stood the test of time, are 
generally adopted by experienced players. In depth, 
then, Whist may be said to be immeasurable, which. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



11 



Chess is not. Moreover, the variety of hands on 
which a Whist player has to exercise his mental 
powers is not only very considerable, but is entirely 
independent of his volition. Hence at Whist an in- 
definite number of perfect games may be played, in 
the sense of obtaining the best practicable result, 
supposing every card played to be the best possible, 
having regard to calculation and to observation. 

The original blindfoldness of the leader at Whist 
with regard to the position of thirty-eight of the cards, 
introduces elements of variety in that game alto- 
gether different from what is met with at Chess. At 
Whist there is a constant endeavor on the part of 
one side to arrive at the maximum result for their 
hands, by the use of observation, memory, inference, 
and judgment, their play being dependent from trick 
to trick on the inferred position of the unknown from 
observation of the known. There is also a similar 
constant endeavor on the part of the other side. 
Here is none of the analytical rigidity which distin- 
guishes Chess. The changeableness of the known 
elements to which analysis can be applied is one of 
the special charms of Whist, and it introduces variety 
of a kind to which there is no parallel in Chess. At 
Chess, the moves are suggested by the application of 
analysis based on inspection ; at Whist, the play 
results from exercise of judgment, based on observa- 
tion and inference. 

The power of the Whist pieces being much more 
limited and defined than that of the men at Chess, 
the nett analytical result in any given Whist case is 
much easier to obtain than in any given Chess case ; 
80 m the matter of duration of interest. Chess must 



12 



CARD ESSAYS. 



be allowed to take a position above Whist, though 
it may be questioned whether the prolonged strain 
requisite to play Chess well does not remove that 
game altogether out of the category of recreations. 

Next, let us measure the social relations of Whist 
and Chess. Whist is sometimes called an unsocial 
game, because lookers-on are not allowed to speak. 
But Chess equally loves retirement and the mute 
silence," and there is no interval at Chess, as there is 
at Whist between the hands, when conversation may 
be freely indulged in. There is no cutting in and 
cutting out, and consequently no frequent change of 
adversaries. Chess, again, only engages two players 
instead of four. And the fact that Whist is a game 
of partnership, introduces social elements which are 
altogether wanting at Chess. Owing to this cause, 
the practice of Whist tends to fit the players for grap- 
pling with the affairs of life. This characteristic of 
Whist has been noticed by several eminent writers. 
Bulwer, himself an accomplished Whist player, refers 
to it in his novel of ''Alice." He says — 'Tate has 
cut and shuffled the cards for you j the game is yours 
unless you revoke ; — pardon my metaphor, — it is a 
favorite one ; — I have worn it threadbare ; but life is 
so like a rubber at Whist." 

Dr. Pole, in illustration of this point, says : — Whist 
is " a perfect microcosm — a complete miniature so- 
ciety in itself. Each player has one friend, to whom 
he is bound by the strongest ties of mutual interest 
and sympathy ; but he has twice the number of ene- 
mies against whose machinations he is obliged to 
keep perpetual guard. He must give strict adherence 
to the established laws and conventional courtesies 



CARD ESSAYS. 



13 



of his social circle ; he is called upon for candid and 
ingenuous behavior ; he must exercise moderation in 
prosperity, patience in adversity, hope in doubtful 
fortune, humility when in error, forbearance to the 
faults of his friends, self-sacrifice for his alhes, equa- 
nimity under the success of his adversaries, and gen- 
eral good temper throughout all his transactions. 
His best efforts will sometimes fail, and fortune will 
favor his inferiors ; but sound principles will triumph 
in the end. Is there nothing in all this analogous to 
the social conditions of ordinary life And again 
the same writer remarks — Does not the proverb 
represent the clever, successful man as * playing his 
cards well ? 

Sir George Lewis, in Methods of Observation and 
Reasoning in Politics,'' says : — We hear of the game 
of politics, and of moves being made on the pohtical 
board. Practical politics, however, do not so much 
resemble a game of Chess as a game of Whist. In 
Chess, the position of the pieces at the beginning of 
the game is precisely similar for both contending jjar- 
ties, and every move is made by the deliberate choice 
of the players. The result depends, therefore, exclu- 
sively on their comparative skill ; chance is alto- 
gether excluded. In Whist, on the other hand, the 
distribution of the cards depends upon chance ; that 
is to say, it depends upon circumstances not within 
the control of any of the players ; but, with the cards 
so casually dealt out, each player plays according to 
his free choice. The result, therefore, depends partly 
upon chance, or luck as it is called, and partly upon 
skill. This is exactly analogous to the state of things 
in politics. A large number of circumstances upon 



14 



CARD ESSAYS, 



which the practical politician has to act are beyond 
his control. They are, hke a hand at cards, dealt 
out to him by a power which he cannot regulate. 
But he can guide those circumstances which are 
within his power, and the ultimate result will de- 
pend, partly upon the character of the circumstances, 
upon which he has to act, and partly upon the wis- 
dom, skill, and prudence with which he conducts 
himself in reference to them. If the circumstances 
are very adverse, the utmost skill may be unavailing 
to produce a successful result. If they be propitious, 
he may be successful with a moderate amount of 
good management. If the circumstances should be 
unfavorable, good management will only meet with 
checkered success, and will be no effectual security 
against occasional reverses, though it will be success- 
ful in the long run, and taking together both favor- 
able and unfavorable circumstances." 

From these extracts it would seem that Whist pos- 
sesses higher claims than Chess from a social point 
of view. 

Lastly, as to fitness for the purposes of recreation. 
In simplicity of construction Whist is peculiarly for- 
tunate. All that is necessary to be known before 
attempting to play is the order of the cards, and the 
facts that the highest card wins the trick and that 
trumps win other suits. Admiral Burney tells a 
story of a young man who was desirous of learning 
Whist. On being informed of the construction of 
the game, he said — Oh ! if that is all, I shall be able 
to play as well as any one in half an hour." If he 
had said he could learn the mise en scene of the game 
in a few minutes, he would have been right. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



15 



Chess, though not a game of extreme complexity, 
reqmres more prehminary instruction than Whist. 
To know the moves is considered by some persons to 
be an accomplishment, and as regards the amount 
of book" requisite to play one or the other game 
fairly well, Whist is a long way to the front. 

Then as to the comparative interest excited by the 
two games. To arrive at a just estimate on this head 
we must divide games into three classes : — 

1. Games of chance, such as rouge-et-noir, rou- 
lette, and pitch-and-toss. These are mere vehicles for 
gambling, and excite scarcely any interest unless 
played for money. 

2. Games into which both skill and chance enter, 
or mixed games, such as whist, piquet, and back- 
gammon. These excite more interest than games of 
chance. 

3. Games of skill, such as chess and draughts. 
These excite too much interest. To play well at 
Chess is too hard work. The game of Chess — not 
skittling Chess, but Chess played as it should be — 
instead of being resorted to as a distraction and a 
relief from toil, is in the hands of real artists the 
business of their lives, and, in this sense, it can hardly 
be regarded as a game at all. 

It is, then, to mixed games that we must look for 
the happy medium which excites sufficient but not 
too great interest. To be candid, it must be admit- 
ted that chance enters too largely into Whist to ren- 
der it a perfect game, o^ving to the preponderance of 
honors. Clay observes on this point that Short Whist 
is ** in full vigor, in spite of at least one very glar- 
ing defect — the undue value of the honors, which are 



16 



CARD ESSAYS. 



pure luck, as compared with that of the tricks, which 
greatly depend on skill. Short Whist bears this 
mark of its hasty and accidental origin. If the 
change had been carefully considered, the honors 
would have been cut in half, as well as the points. 
Two by honors would have counted one point. Four 
by honors would have counted two. Had this been 
so, the game would be perfect, but the advantage of 
skill would be so great as to limit considerably the 
number of players." Clay then explains the circum- 
stances of the hasty and accidental origin " of Short 
Whist. He continues: — "Some sixty or seventy 
years back," that would be about the beginning of 
this century, "Lord Peterborough having one night 
lost a large sum of money, the friends with whom he 
was Inlaying proposed to make the game five points 
instead of ten, in order to give the loser a chance, at 
a quicker game, of recovering his loss." 

It is no secret that the committee appointed in 1863 
to revise the laws of Whist had the question of the 
reduction of honors brought before them ; but they 
feared to make so large an alteration in the game, 
lest the new laws should only meet with loartial adop- 
tion. 

JN'evertheless, Whist, with its imperfectly-balanced 
complements of skill and chance, goes very near to 
exciting the proper amount of interest. The entry of 
chance into Whist diminishes the labor of playing, 
and varies the faculties of the mind called into opera- 
tion. The combinations that ensue afford numerous 
openings for the employment of skill, and watching 
the chances keeps the mental powers pleasantly oc- 
cupied, while the cessation of play between the hands, 



CARD ESSAYS. 



17 



like the pause between the beats of the heart, obvi- 
ates the iil-effect of long-continued effort. 

The objection sometimes brought against Whist, 
that it is a card game, and that therefore it may lead 
to gambhng, does not require serious refutation. 
Chess may be, and often is, played for money; but it 
is no discredit to any game that it may be abused 
instead of being used. 

Has it not been shown that Whist, as a game, pos- 
sesses claims to be ranked above Chess ? Has it not 
been shown that Whist is calculated to promote to 
the utmost the amusement and relaxation of those 
employed ? The game of Whist may fairly be said 
to combine the means of innocent recreation, of 
healthy excitement, and of appropriate mental exer- 
cise, and thuiP to fulfil, in the highest degree, the 
purposes for which it was designed. 

3 



18 



CARD ESSAYS. 



ON THE MORALITr OF CARD-PLAYING. 



**A man, no Shoter (not longe agoo) wolde defende playing at 
Gardes and Dise, if it were honestly used.'* 

—Toxophilus, Roger Ascham. 

"Let Cards, therefore, not be depreciated; an happy invention, 
which, adapted equally to every capacity, removes the invidious dis- 
tinctions of nature, bestows on fools the pre-eminence of genius, or 
reduces wit and wisdom to the level of folly." ^ 

—History of Great Britain^ Hekry, vol. xii. p. 385. 



In the previous paper it was argued that games at 
their best combine the means of innocent recreation, 
of healthy excitement, and of appropriate mental 
exercise. A perfect game ought to excite such an 
amount of interest that it may be played for its own 
sake, without needing the stimulus of gambling. 

The reason cards are regarded as the gamester's 
stock-in-trade all over the world is, no doubt, that 
they may readily, and in various ways, be made to 
minister to the excitement of play.'' At the same 
time it must not be forgotten that cards also minister 
with equal readiness to the lawful amusement of 
men. But, inasmuch as cards are frequently made 
use of as convenient gambling implements, the 

devil's books" are associated by many excellent 



CARD ESSAYS. 



19 



people, who only regard one side of the shield, with 
all kinds of wickedness. Gambling, with its concom- 
itants, cheating, quarrelling, swearing, and many 
other vicious habits, have been unsparingly attrib- 
uted to the card table. This is a mere consequence 
of association of ideas. The shady doings charged 
on cards should properly be charged on games, 
whether of cards or not, whose exciting element is a 
stake, the winning or losing of which depends on 
chance. Cards, properly used, are seductive, but 
harmless instruments of social relaxation. It is no 
reason we should refrain from playing with cards 
because other persons have made a bad use of them. 
We might as well all become total abstainers because 
some of our countrymen are in the habit of getting 
drunk. It may be regarded as an axiom that the 
unsatisfactory associations connected with card-play- 
ing have arisen solely from the abuse of cards, and 
not from any evil qualities necessarily inherent in 
them. As M. Merlin remarks {Origine des Cartes a 
jouer, Paris, 1869), Cards have not created the pas- 
sion of play ; it has been a moral flaw from the most 
remote antiquity. But cards have assisted in devel- 
oping this passion, because they offer it a very man- 
ageable and attractive instrument." 

The present paper, then, will resolve itself into an 
examination of the morality of playing at any game 
for a stake, and not necessarily of playing at card- 
games for a stake. It will be a convenient method 
of conducting this examination to begin by quoting 
various writers who have recorded their opinions on 
the subject. 

St. Cyprian, in a homily of high antiquity on gam- 



20 



CARD ESSAYS. 



ing, entitled De Aleatoribus (probably not written by 
St. Cyprian), calls games of hazard the nets of the 
Devil ; and affirms that they were invented at the 
prompting of the evil spirit. The writer consequently 
maintains that whosoever plays at such games offers 
sacrifice to their author, and so commits an act of 
idolatry. Others have held similar opinions. Daniel 
Souter, a Flemish clergyman, in a treatise published 
about the middle of the seventeenth century, main- 
tains that all games of hazard are contrary to every 
one of the ten commandments I 

In the latter part of the sixteenth century was pub- 
lished A Treatise wherein Dicing, Daucing, Vaine 
Plaies or Enterludes, with other idle pastimes, &;c., 
commonly vsed on the Sabboth day, are reprooved 
by the Authoritie of the Worde of God and auncient 
writers. Made Dialogue-wise by John Northbrooke. 
Imprinted at London by Thomas Dawson, for George 
Bishoppe, 1579.'* 

The reverend author is very verbose, and rather 
declaims than argues against play. In his address to 
the reader he says — What is a man now a daies if 
he knows not fashions and ho we to weare his apparell 
after the best fashion ? to keepe Companie, and to be- 
come Mummers and Dice plaiers, and to plaie their 
twentie, fortie, or 100.?. at Gardes, Dice, &c., Post, 
Cente, Gleke or such other games : if he cannot thus 
do he is called a miser, a wretch, a lobbe, a cloune, 
and one that knoweth no fellowship nor fashions, and 
less honestie. And by such kind of Plaies many of 
them are brought into great Miserie and Penurie." 

In the Invective against Dice-plaie (and an in- 
vective it is very properly named), the arguments, 



CARD ESSAYS. 



21 



such as they are, amount briefly to this — that though 
honest men play, the persons make not the play good, 
but rather it makes them bad. That loss of goods is 
to be imputed to the play as well as to the men, for if 
you take away the means there will be no playing, 
and it is most diflBcult for a man to restrain the bridle 
of things desired. Dice were invented by Lucifer, the 
Prince of Devils, and dice-play leads to blasphemy, 
robbery, craft, covetousness, deceit, and a list of hor- 
rors too long to quote, but embracing nearly every 
possible crime. To the question whether it is lawful 
to play any game for money, the author answers in 
the negative, because play was not appointed as a 
means to get money, but only for exercise or recrea- 
tion ; and whoever uses it for gain, abuses and changes 
the intention ; and whatever a man wins at play, 
being naughtily gotten, is not his own. As for cards, 
they are almost as bad as dice, but not quite, as wit 
is more used at cards, and less trust in chance and 
fortune. Dice-play is the mother, card-play the 
daughter. They draw, both with one string, all the 
followers thereof into idleness, loitering, blasphemy, 
misery, infamy, penury and confusion. He then quotes 
St. Cyprian, and agrees with him that cards were in- 
vented by the Devil to bring in idolatry among men. 
For the Kings and coate cards, he says, were in old 
times the images and idols of false gods. He finally 
concludes that cards and dice are only fit for. brutal 
and ignorant men. 

In 1583 was pubhshed The Anatomie of Abuses, 
containing A Discoverie or briefe Summarie of such 
notable Vices and Corruptions as now raigne in many 
Christian Countreyes of the World ; but especially 



22 



CARD ESSAYS. 



in the Countrey Ailghs'A [Anglia, England]. Together 
with the most fearefull Examples of God's Judgments 
executed upon the Wicked for the same, as well in 
Ailgnia of late as in other Places elsewhere. Made 
Dialogue-wise by Philip Stubs." In the person of 
Philoponus, he remarks — *' As for Cards, Dice, Tables, 
Boules, Tennise and such hke, thei are Furta Offioiosa, 
a certaine kind of smoothe, deceipt-full and sleightie 
thefte, whereby many a one is spoiled of all that he 
ever hath, sometimes of his hfe withall, yea, of bodie 
and soule for ever : and yet (more is the pitie) these 
bee the only exercises used in every mans house, al 
the yere through. But especially in Christmas Time, 
there is nothing els used but Cardes, Dice, Tables, 
Maskyng, Mummyng, Bouhng, and such like fooleries. 
And the reason is, thei think thei have a commission 
and prerogative that tyme to doe what thei hst, and 
to folio we what vanitie thei will. But (alas) doe thei 
thinke that thei are privileged at that tyme to doe 
evill ? the holier the tyme is (if one tyme were holier 
than another, as it is not) the hoher ought their ex- 
ercises to bee." 

Nevertheless, he allows that men may sometimes 
play at games for recreation, but not for money. 
Being asked by Spudeus, "Is it not lawfull for one 
Christian man to plaie with an other at any kinde of 
Grame, or to winne his money, if he can ?" he replies. 

To plaie at Tables, Cardes, Dice, Boules or the like 
(though a good Christian man will not so idely and 
vainely spend his golden dales), one Christian with 
another, for their private recreations, after some op- 
pression of studie, to drive awaie fantasies, and suche 
like, I doubt not but thei may, using it moderately, 



CARD ESSAYS. 



23 



with intermission, and in the feare of God. But for to 
plaie for lucre of gaine, and for desire onely of his 
brother's substance, rather than for any other cause, 
is at no hande lawfull, or to be suffered. For as it is 
not lawfull to robbe, steale, and purloine by deceite 
or sleight, so it is not lawfull to get thy brother's 
goodes from hym by Cardyng, Dicyng, Tablyng, 
Boulyng, or any other kind of theft, for these games 
are no better, nay worser than open theft, for open 
theft every man can beware of ; but this beying a 
craftie, polliticke theft, and commonly doen under 
pretence of freendship, fewe, or none at all, can be- 
ware of it. The Commandement saieth. Thou shalt 
not covet nor desire anything that belongeth to thy 
neighbour. Now, it is manifest that those that plaie 
for money, not onely covet their brother's money, but 
also use craft, falshood, and deceite to winne the 
same." 

At the end of the sixteenth century, James Balm- 
ford, a Puritanical clergyman, or as he would now be 
called, a Low Churchman, published a pamphlet of 
sixteen pages, called A short and plain Dialogue 
concerning the Unlawfulness of playing at Cards or 
Tables," 1593, dedicated to " Master Lionel Maddison, 
Maior, the Aldermen his brethern,. and the godly Bur- 
gesses of Newcastle-upon-Tine." The characters in- 
troduced by the author are a Professor and a Preacher. 
It appears that the Professor had read, in the " Com- 
mon-places" of Peter Martyr, a statement that dice- 
playing is unlawful, because it depends on chance. 
But as he was not convinced by this that playing at 

tables " i.e., backgammon, trie-trie, &c., is unlawful 
(skill being then introduced), he craves the Preacher's 



24 



CARD ESSAYS. 



opinion concerning the lawfulness of tables and cards. 
The Preacher, who, we may presume, represents the 
author's view, strongly objects to these games on 
moral grounds, and determines that all such games 
are unlawful in the following words : — Lots are not 
to be used in Sport : but Grames, consisting in Chance, 
as Dice, Cards, are Lots ; therefore, not to be used 
in Sport." He then refers to Joshua xviii. 10 ; 1 
Samuel xiv. 41 ; Jonah i. 7 ; Malachi i. 6, 7 ; and 
Hebrews vi. 16, in confirmation of his view. Joshua 
xviii., however, hardly supports the Preacher's doc- 
trine, as there lots are cast before the Lord," i.e., 
with the sanction of the Most High, to determine the 
division of the land of several of the tribes. The 
Preacher gets out of this difficulty by admitting that 
Lots are sanctified to a peculiar use, viz. : to end con- 
troversies, by which he probably means to prevent 
quarrelling. But he carefully omits any reference to 
the casting of lots for the sacrifice (Lev. xvi. 8), where 
the plea of ending controversies wall not help him. 

Finally, the Preacher condemns all games w^hich 
depend on chance j and he further refuses to counte- 
nance games at all, even if played for amusement 
only ; for, even granting that such games are lawful, 
he is of opinion that the desire of gain would soon 
creep in, according to the common saying, Sine 
lucro friget Indus. 

A little later, 1610, WilhamAmes, fellow of Christ's 
College, preached at St. Mary's against cards and 
dice, as being forbidden by Scripture ; but his sermon 
gave much offence, and he was obliged to withdraw 
from the University to avoid expulsion. 

Gisbert Yoet also supported Balmford and Ames. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



25 



As at this time party feeling ran strong between 
die Puritans and the High Churchmen, the views of 
the former could not be passed over in silence. Ac- 
cordingly in 1619 the learned Thomas Gataker pub- 
lished his well-known treatise * ' On the Nature and 
Use of Lots," in which he combats the opinions of 
Balm ford and others. He classes Lots under three 
heads : — 1. Lots which are commonly employed in 
serious affairs : 2. Lots which enter into games of 
chance ; and 3. Lots extraordinary or divinatory. 

Gataker considers Lots of the first kind to be inno- 
cent. The third class he condemns, except they are 
expressly required to be used by a revelation or 
Divine command. As to Lots which enter into games, 
with which we are principally concerned in this paper, 
Gataker thinks they were neither prohibited by the 
Scriptures nor evil in themselves. He candidly admits 
that they are liable to great abuse ; but, while he 
earnestly deprecates such abuse, he argues forcibly 
that it is not a necessary consequence of the employ- 
ment of Lots in games played for amusement. 

The controversy thus started raged for some time, 
both sides retaining their own views. A summary of 
the whole affair is given in the preface to the second 
edition of " Traite du Jeu, ou Von examine les princi- 
pales Questions de Droit naturel et de Morale, qui ont 
du Rapport a cette Matiere, Far Jean Barbeyrac, 
Professeur en Droit a Gfroningue,'' 1738. The first 
edition was published in 1710. It is said that Bar- 
beyrac was induced to write the work in consequence 
of being frequently appealed to by ladies who came 
to play cards with his mother-in law, with whom he 
resided. 



26 



CARD ESSAYS. 



In his preface, Barbeyrac says: — "I am not sur- 
prised that Grataker should have been violently 
opposed when he maintained the lawfulness of lots, 
considering the date at which he wrote. It, however, 
appears strange to me that, in an age when so many 
philosophical and theological prejudices have been 
shaken off, people can still be found, who, regarding 
only the abuse which may arise out of the use of 
things which are harmless in themselves, condemn 
them as absolute evils, on frivolous or extremely 
doubtful grounds. Such condemnation is more likely 
to confirm abuse than to correct it * * * for, a 
favorite passion is apt to acquire fresh vigor if a 
pretext for its indulgence is discovered in the weak- 
ness of the arguments with which it is assailed. * * 
I greatly doubt whether a gamester was ever deterred 
from play by arguments brought forward to persuade 
him that his practices contravene the ordinances of 
Divine Providence." 

The following is a short analysis of Barbeyrac's 
solid reasons " for approving of ]3lay : — Man was not 
sent into the world by the Creator to pass his time in 
eating, drinking, and merry-making, but to be em- 
ployed in matters of utility and serious consideration. 
He has no right to waste his mental powers by remain- 
ing idle, nor in perpetual rounds of dissipation and 
amusement. He is bound to do some kind of work 
or other ; and even if he has the means of living 
without labor, he still ought to find some creditable 
employment, to render himself a useful member of 
society. 

Man, however, was not created to labor incessantly 
without relaxation. The human machine soon gets 



CARD ESSAYS. 



27 



out of order if worked too hard. The ancients said, 
*'Take recreation in order to make progress with 
work," and Rest is the seasoning of labor." The 
day and night mark out hours of labor and repose, 
and teach us that each is equally indispensable. 
Morality and Rehgion require us to take innocent 
pleasures ; and it is unjust to condemn those who do 
so discreetly. 

But there are people who fancy that use and abuse 
are inseparable ; and, forming mystical notions of 
virtue and piety, would have us reject all kinds of 
diversion, as being unworthy of reasoning creatures. 
Such persons aspire to a state of perfection unattain- 
able by human nature. I maintain, then, we may 
indulge in amusements that are themselves free from 
vice. If a person finds pleasure in playing at billiards, 
chess, cards, backgammon, or even with dice, why 
may he not amuse himself with them as well as in 
promenading, with music, in the chase, in fishing, in 
drawing, and in a thousand similar ways ? 

The question then remains. Is the game to be for 
nothing or for a stake of some value ? If there is no 
stake there can be no semblance of criminahty ; and, 
if there is a stake, I do not see any evil, if we look at 
the matter in a proper light. 

Barbeyrac's arguments are so far good. But when 
he comes to the conclusion that games are not im- 
moral whether the stakes are large or small, he takes 
a view which is indefensible. He continues thus : — If 
I am at Hberty to promise and give my property to 
whomsoever I choose, why may I not promise and 
give a certain sum in the event of another person 
proving more fortunate or more skilful than I am. 



88 



CARD ESSAYS. 



with respect to the result of certain combinations 
previously agreed on? Why may not this person 
avail himself of skill or fortune on an issue about 
which we voluntarily contract an obligation ? Every 
person is at liberty to cede property to another, the 
cession being dependent on fortuitous circumstances. 
Hence a ]3erson inay fairly win if he himself risks the 
loss of as much as he can gain on the event. In fact, 
play is a kind of contract ; and in every contract the 
will of the parties is the supreme law. 

Barbeyrac is here in error. Persons are restrained 
by law (which may be taken to represent the moral 
sense of the communit^^), from ceding their property 
to others except for a consideration. People who 
enter into contracts that are contrary to the usages of 
society, or which are opposed to the laws of the coun- 
try in which they reside, are not compelled to fulfil 
these contracts. If the loser of a wager refuses to 
pay his losses, the law will not assist the winner to 
enforce payment. And very jDroperly so ; for to hold 
the loser to the original bargain would, as a rule, in- 
flict a greater injury on society than allowing him 
to repudiate it. 

Barbeyrac's work has been introduced out of its 
chronological order, as it completes the controversy 
on the nature and use of lots. 

We now go back to the beginning of the seven- 
teenth century. In 1615, a curious Rabbinical tract 
on gaming, called Sur Mera" (Depart from Evil), 
was printed at Venice. The name of the author is 
not known. It is in the form of a dialogue between 
tw^o young Jews — Medad, w^ho maintains the lawful- 
ness of gaming, and Eldad, who is opposed to *'play." 



CARD ESSAYS. 



29 



Medad says that "play'' is commendable, for it 
causes men to forget the cares of daily life. In com- 
merce, things pass from one to another by way of 
barter or sale, and why should not '^play" be esti- 
mated the same as any other business, at which money 
is sometimes lost and sometimes gained. 

Eldad answers that traffic, or commerce, is pro- 
ductive of benefit to both the buyer and seller, on 
which Medad observes that merchants will buy and 
lock up corn or wine, and then look to Heaven for the 
signs of bad weather, and rejoice at the storm which 
destroys the vintage and crops of the year, because the 
holder will thus be enriched. He asks triumphantly, 
Is there any mutual benefit in this, when one man's 
profit depends on the injury of the rest of the 
world ? 

Eldad rephes that this is not fair trade ; it is mere 
speculation, which is in fact gambling. 

In the remainder of the tract, Eldad endeavors to 
show that a gamester breaks all the ten command- 
ments, and that, according to the Talmud, he can 
neither be a judge nor a witness. Medad answers, 
and cites opposite passages. Then they recite poetry,- 
in which the miseries and the pleasures of a game- 
ster's life are set forth by each ; and finally, of course, 
Medad yields, and admits that the cause he had 
maintained is bad. 

In the middle of the seventeenth century, Jeremy 
Taylor pubhshed his opinions on '^play." In the 
words of Archdeacon Butler, Taylor was one of the 
most truly pious and most profoundly learned prelates 
that ever adorned any age or country; nor," adds 
the Archdeacon, do I think that the most rigid of 



30 



CARD ESSAYS. 



our disciplinarians can produce the authority of a 
wiser or a better man." 

On the Question on Gaming, Whether or no the 
making and providing such instruments which usually 
minister to it, is by interpretation such an aid to the 
sin as to involve us in the guilt ? " the Bishop writes 
as follows : — 

* * Many fierce declamations from ancient sanctity 
have been uttered against cards and dice by reason 
of the craft used in the game, and the consequent 
evils, as invented by the Devil. And, indeed, this is 
almost the whole state of the question, for there are 
so many evils in the use of these sports ; they are 
made trades of fraud and livelihood ; they are accom- 
panied so with drinking and swearing ; they are so 
scandalous by blasphemies and quarrels ; so infamous 
by misspending precious time, and the ruin of many 
families ; they so often make wise men fools and 
slaves of passion, that we may say of those who use 
them inordinately that they are in an ocean of mis- 
chief, and can hardly swim to shore without perishing. 
But that cards are themselves lawful, I do not know 
any reason to doubt. He can never be suspected in 
any criminal sense to tempt Divine Providence, who 
by contingent things recreates his labor, and, having 
acquired his refreshment, hath no other end to serve, 
and no desires to engage the Divine Providence to 
any other purpose. * * * A man may innocently, 
and to good purposes go to a tavern ; but they who 
frequent them have no excuse unless their innocent 
business does frequently engage, and their severe 
Religion bring them off safely. And so it is in these 
sports ; there is only one cause of using them, and 



CARD ESSAYS. 



31 



that comes but seldom — the refreshment, I mean, of 
myself or my friend, to which I minister in justice or 
in charity. But when our sports come to that excess 
that we long and seek for opportunities ; when we 
tempt others, are weary of our business and not weary 
of our game ; when we sit up till midnight, and spend 
half days, and that often too ; then we have spoiled 
the sport — it is not a recreation but a sin. * * * 
He that means to make his games lawful must not 
play for money, but for refreshment. This, though 
few may believe, yet is the most considerable thing to 
be amended in the games of civil and sober persons. 
For the gaining of money can have no influence in 
the game to make it the more recreative, unless 
covetousness holds the box. * * * when 
money is at stake, either the sum is trifling, or it is 
considerable. If trifling it can be of no purpose, 
unless to serve the ends of some little hospitable 
entertainment or love-feast, and then there is nothing 
amiss ; but if considerable, a wide door is opened to 
temptation, and a man cannot be indifferent to win 
or lose a great sum of money, though he can easily 
pretend it. If a man be willing or indifferent to lose 
his own money, and not at all desirous to get another's, 
to what purpose is it that he plays for it ? If he be 
not indifferent, then he is covetous, or he is a fool ; 
he covets what is not his own, or unreasonably 
ventures that which is. If without the money he 
cannot mind his game, then the game is no divertise- 
ment, no recreation ; but the money is all the sport, 
and therefore covetousness is all the design. But if 
he can be recreated by the game alone, the money 
does but change it from lawful to unlawful, and the 



32 



CARD ESSAYS. 



man from being weary to become covetous; and, 
from the trouble of labor or study, remove him to the 
worse trouble of fear, or anger, or impatient desires. 
Here begins the mischief; here men begin, for the 
money, to use vile arts ; here cards and dice begin to 
be diabolical, when players are witty to defraud and 
undo one another ; when estates are ventured and 
families are made sad and poor by a luckless chance. 
And what sport is it to me to lose my money, if it be 
at all valuable ? and if it be not, what is it to my 
game ? But sure the pleasure is in winning the 
money ; that certainly is it. But they who make a 
pastime of a neighbor's ruin, are the worst of men, 
said the comedy. But concerning the loss of our 
money, let a man pretend what he will, that he plays 
for no more than he is willing to lose, it is certain 
that we ought not to believe him ; for if that sum is 
so indifferent to him, why is he not easy to be tempted 
to give such a sum to the poor ? Whenever this is 
the case, he sins that games for money beyond an 
inconsiderable sum. Let the games be nothing, or 
almost nothing, and the cards or dice are innocent, 
and the game as innocent as push-pin. * * * in 
plays and games, as in other entertainments, we 
must neither do evil, nor seem to do evil ; we must 
not converse with evil persons, nor use our liberty to 
a brother's prejudice or grief. We must not do any- 
thing which he, with probability, or with innocent 
weakness, thinks to be amiss, until he is rightly in- 
structed ; but, where nothing of these things intervene, 
and nothing of the former evils is appendant, we 
may use our liberty with reason and sobriety ; and 
then, if this liberty can be so used, and such recrea- 



CARD ESSAYS. 



B8 



tions can be innocent, as they assuredly may, there 
is no further question but those trades which 
minister to these divertisements are innocent and 
lawful/' 

The whole of this passage is truly admirable ; but, 
if one may venture to criticise so eminent a writer, 
two objections may be made to it. The one is that 
there is a use in a stake, independently of winning or 
losing it, as will appear hereafter ; the other is, that 
the Bishop fails to perceive the distinction between 
the amount risked on each game, and the expectation 
{as it is termed in mathematics) of gain or loss on a 
series of games. Most people who play cards at all 
can afford to play sixpenny jDoints at whist ; but it 
does not follow that they could afford to give half a 
crown to the poor at the conclusion of every rubber 
(about the average result), whether they won or lost 
it. The player expects to win some rubbers and to 
lose others ; and at the end of a considerable number 
of rubbers played, say during a twelvemonth, he ex- 
pects to be in or out of pocket at most a few pounds, 
which he can well afford, if he loses, to pay for his 
amusement. If he wins, and has any conscientious 
scruples about the lawfulness of retaining money won 
at play (Luther was of opinion that it may be law- 
fully retained), he may, likef Parson Dale in '*My 
JS^ovel," treat himself to the additional gratification 
of distributing it in charity. 

St. Francis de Sales, according to the Mimoirs 
sur la Cour de Louis XIV. et de la Regence " (Paris, 
1823), went so far as to cheat at cards, and excused 
himself for so doing, by saying that whatever he won 
was for the poor ! When the Archbishop of Aix 

3 



84 



CARD ESSAYS. 



learnt that St. Francis was about to be canonized, 
he said he was delighted to hear of liis good fortune, 

' qiioiquHl il tricliat an piquet'- 'Mais, Mon- 
seignetir.' Jul dit-on, ' est-il possible qu'un Saint 
friponne an jeu f ' ' Ro.' repliqua VArcheveque, iJ 
disait, pour ses raisons, que ce qu i! gagnait etait 
pour les paiivres.' St. Francis does not appear to 
have been very particular nor very consistent ; for 
later in life he condemned all games at cards as being 

simply and naturally bad and reprehensible.'" 

John Locke, in his Treatise on Education,'* 1693, 
says — As to cards and dice, I think the safest and 
best way is never to learn any play upon them, and 
so to be incapacitated for those dangerous temjota- 
tions and incroaching wasters of useful time." 

Robert ]N"elson, a learned and piotis English gentle- 
man, author of '''A Comx3anion for the Fasts and 
Festivals of the Church of England," and of the 

Practice of true Devotion,"' 1708, says in the latter 
work, Sober persons do not make a business of 
what they should use as a diversion." Hence he 
considers there is no objection to cards played for 
amusement. 

Addison, however, abotit the same time Q711), in 
Xo. 93 of the Spjectator. on ''• Proi3er Methods of Em- 
ploying Time." held the opposite view. He says, I 
must confess I think it is below reasonable creatures 
to be altogetlier conversant in such diversions as are 
merely innocent, and have nothing else to recom- 
mend thein, but that there is no hurt in them. 
Whether any kind of gaming has even this much to 
say for itself, I shall not determine ; but I think 
it very wonderful to see persons of the best sense 



CARD ESSAYS. 



35 



passing away a dozen hours together in shuffling and 
dividing a pack of cards, with no other conversation 
but what is made up of a few game phrases, and no 
other ideas but those of black or red spots ranged to- 
gether in different figures. Would not a man laugh 
to hear one of this species complaining that life is 
short? " 

Jeremy Collier, in his " Essay on Graming," 1713, 
which takes the form of a dialogue between Dolo- 
medes and Callimachus (the author), expresses his 
opinions (which are here condensed) as follows : — 

Deep play sets the spirits on float, strikes the mind 
strongly into the face, and discovers a man's weak- 
ness very remarkably. You may see the passions 
come up with the dice, and ebb and flow with the 
fortune of the game. The sentence for execution is 
not received with more concern than the unlucky 
appearance of a cast or a card. Some people are miser- 
ably ruffled, and distressed to an agony ; others are 
no less foolishly pleased, and so bring their covetous 
humor into view. Why then resign repose of mind 
and credit of temper to the mercy of chance ? 

Bolomedes then points out that some people play 
without the least ruffle, and lose great sums with de- 
cency and indifference. 

Callimachus replies this is merely a copy of the 
countenance, things being not so smooth within as 
without. The anguish is concealed. But if the 
players are really unconcerned, and a heavy blow 
brings no smart, the case is worse. Such stoicism is 
the speediest dispatch to beggary. It makes the man 
foolhardy and renew the combat. But it is rarely 
met with. When misfortune strikes home, the tem- 



86 



CARD ESSAYS. 



per generally goes with the money, according to the 
proverb, Qui perd le si en, perd le sens." One loss 
makes people desperate, and leads to another; the 
head grows misty with ill luck, and the man becomes 
an easier conquest. When your bubbles are going- 
down the hill, you lend them a push, though their 
bones are broken at the bottom. 

When things, with a promising face, sicken, the 
spirits of your gaming sparks are up immediately ; 
they are a storm at the first blast, the train takes fire 
like gunpowder. Then, nothing is more common 
than oaths and execrable language. Instead of 
blaming their own rashness, they curse their stars, 
and rage against their fate, and these paroxysms 
sometimes run so high, you would think the Devil 
had seized the organs of speech ; and these hideous 
sallies are sometimes carried on to quarrelling and 
murder. The hazards of play are frightful ; a box 
and dice are terrible artillery. 

In the Reminiscences" of the Rev. R. Polwhele, 
1773, occurs a letter from Augustus Toplady, a cler- 
gyman and a high Calvinist, approving of cards and 
other games, and stating his opinion that the clergy 
may innocently indulge in various recreations. He 
says — I do not think that honest Martin Luther 
committed sin by playing at Backgammon for an 
hour or two after dinner, in order, by unbending his 
mind, to promote digestion. 

I cannot blame the holy martyr, Bishop Ridley, 
for frequently playing at Tennis before he became a 
prelate, nor for playing at the more serious game of 
Chess twice a day, after he was made a bishop. 

As little do I find fault with another of our most 



CARD ESSAYS. 



37 



exemplary martyrs, the learned and devout Mr. Arch- 
deacon Philpot, who has left it on record, as a brand 
on Pelagians of that age, that ' they looked on hon- 
este pastyme as a sinne ; ' and had the impudence to 
call him an Antinomian and a loose moralist, be- 
cause he now and then relaxed his bow with * hun- 
tynge, shootynge, bowlynge, and such like.' 

Nor can I set down pious Bishop Latimer for 
such an enemy to holiness of life, on account of his 
saying that hunting is a good exercise for men of 
rank, and that shooting is as lawful an amusement 
for persons of inferior class. 

* ' I have not a whit the worse opinion of the emi- 
nent and profound Mr. Thomas Grataker, for the 
Treatise which he professedly wrote to prove the law- 
fulness of card playing, under the due restrictions 
and limitations. 

I cannot condemn the Vicar of Broad Hembury 
[i.e,, himself] for relaxing himself now and then 
among ^ few select friends with a rubber of sixpenny 
Whist, a pool of penny Quadrille, or a few rounds of 
twopenny Pope-Joan. To my certain knowledge, 
the said Vicar has been cured of headache by one or 
other of those games, after spending eight, ten or 
twelve, and sometimes sixteen hours in his study. 
Nor will he ask any man's leave for so unbending 
himself, — because another person's conscience is no 
rule to his, any more than another person's stature 
or complexion." 

Dr. Johnson Tour to the Hebrides," 1785) re- 
gretted he had not learnt to play at cards, giving as 
his reason, ' * It is very useful in life ; it generates kind- 



38 



CARD ESSAYS 



ness and consolidates society." This reminds one of 
Talleyrand's mo^ respecting Whist, *'Vous ne savez 
pas done le Wliiste, jenne homme. Quelle triste 
vieillesse tous tous preparez ! " 

John "Wilson, Professor of Moral Philosophy in the 
University of Edinburgh, was in favor of card games, 
if we may assume that he exjDresses his own senti- 
ments in the Nodes Aiiibro stance, 1826. The dialogue 
t)n gaming, between himself and the Ettrick Shep- 
herd, may thus be summed up : — 

There are families, especially austere Calvinists 
who abhor cards, and their principles ought to be 
respected. Nevertheless, old people, a little dim-eyed 
or so, might do much worse than while away an occa- 
sional evening at an innocent and cheerful game at 
cards. It is true that cards are not absolutely ne- 
cessary, but unless people are greedy and play for the 
pool, there is no objection to them. Indeed, among 
the leisured classes, card-playing in moderation is 
harmless. But as for "Hells" (or gaming-houses) , 
they cannot be too severely condemned. 

William Andrew Chatto, discussing the morality 
of card-playing in his "Facts and Speculations on 
Playing-Cards," 1848, says — ''Most persons who play 
for high stakes, either at games of pure chance, or of 
chance and skill combined, make more or less a 
traffic of their amusement ; and risk their own money 
from a desire of winning that of another. In all such 
cases gaming is a iDositive evil to society, and is utterly 
inexcusable, much less justifiable, on am' grounds 
whatever ; and all who thus venture large sums may 
be justly required to show by what right they possess 
them. When a fool or a knave is thus stripped of a 



CARD ESSAYS. 



39 



large property, his loss is a matter of small import 
to society ; the true evil is, that so large a portion of 
national wealth, created by the industry of others, 
should be at the disposal of such a character, and 
should be allowed to pass, on such a contract^ to an- 
other even more worthless than himself. This objec- 
tion has not been urged in any of the numerous ser- 
mons and essays that have been pubhshed against 
gaming ; the authors of which generally, instead of 
showing that society has both the power and the 
right to correct such abuses, by depriving the offend- 
ing parties of the means of continuing them, have 
contented themselves with declamations on the wick- 
edness of the pursuit, and with vain appeals to the 
conscience of inveterate gamesters : while they whistle 
to the deaf adder, they never seem to suspect that it 
may be easily dispatched with a stick.'' 

While some few authorities condemn games of all 
kinds, the great majority approve of games played in 
moderation, and even for a small stake, if the chief 
idea of the players is mental or bodily refreshment. 
Only one writer is bold enough not to denounce 
unlimited stakes, and he has already been dealt with. 

The great difficulty seem.s to be this : — If the game 
in itself is sufficiently interesting to keep the players 
pleasantly occupied, and to afford materials for inno- 
cent and healthy enjoyment, why play for a stake at 
all? 

None of the quoted ^vi'iters have answered this 
question. Mr. Richard A. Proctor, in The EcTig of 
July 17, 1878, says, I cannot see the sense of play- 
ing for insignificant stakes. It Is only when the 
stakes are large enough to be more than the player 



40 



CARD ESSAYS. 



can afford than any excitement can be added to the 
pleasure which a good game hke Whist affords in 
itself. And when once the stakes are allowed to 
attain such an amount, the play becomes gambling." 

Mr. Proctor thinks the reason may be that it is 
customary to play for something, and that conse- 
quently people must either fall in with the custom 
or abstain from playing. 

This, however, is only a statement of the fact, not 
an exi)lanation of it. Inasmuch as games are almost 
invariably played for a stake, and that by persons 
who have no desire of gain, there must be a reason 
for the custom. 

The explanation appears to be this. The use of a 
small stake is to define the interest. It is not the 
amount dependent on the family rubber or friendly 
game at billiards that increases the pleasure of the 
players ] indeed many people who play Whist for 
sixpenny points or back themselves for a shilling at 
billiards would feel very uncomfortable, and have 
their pleasure diminished, if a large sum hung on the 
result. But there is just the difference between play- 
ing for something or for nothing that there is between 
purpose and no purpose. If we walk or ride we do 
not go round and round in a circle. We go out if 
possible with a purpose, to visit some person or place? 
We have perhaps no particular reason to take one 
direction rather than another ; but we feel more in- 
terest in our walk or ride if we have a definite object 
in view. 

Then comes the point, What do you mean by a 
small stake ? Where does defining interest end and 
gambling begin ? 



CARD ESSAYS. 



41 



Each individual must decide this for himself. It 
depends mainly on the means of the players. As 
long as it is a matter of indifference to those engaged 
whether they win or lose the amount staked, having 
regard also to their expectation on a series, so long 
are they without the pale of gambling. The mo- 
ment any anxiety is felt as to the fate of the sum 
depending on the result, the sooner the stakes are 
reduced the better. It is clear that if half-starved 
street Arabs toss for coppers they are gambling. It 
is equally clear that if two well-to-do friends toss 
which of them shall pay for a sjDlit brandy-and-soda, 
they are not gambling. To pursue this still further ; 
if a clerk earning a hundred a year backs his fancy 
for the Derby for ten pounds, he is gambling ; but if 
a wealthy owner of race horses puts the same on his 
favorite two-year-old, he is not gambling. To the 
one ten pounds is an object ; to the other it is a mere 
trifle. 

The good sense of the community generally fixes 
the stakes at a reasonable sum, in accordance with 
the view just propounded. Thus, at Whist, the do- 
mestic rubber may be played for postage-stamps or 
for silver three-pennies ; in general society, shillings, 
with perhaps an extra half-crown on the rubber, are 
common enough ; while at the Clubs, where money 
flows more easily, half-crown or crown points are the 
ruhng prices. At crack Clubs, where many of the 
members are men of wealth, higher points are, of 
course, to be met with. 

No doubt there is a temptation to men of moderate 
income to play high when they have the entree into 
circles where money is played for. For example : De 



42 



CARD ESSAYS. 



Jones is a man of family, and as such a member of 
the Coronet Club where the usual stakes are twos 
and tens. But De Jones is a younger son, and his 
income may be reckoned on three fingers. If De 
Jones is so fond of a rubber that he must wander into 
the card-room of the Coronet, he ought to retire from 
the club and join another club where the points are 
lower. His position, however, as a tempted man, is 
not peculiar ; there are temptations in every path 
of life as well as at the card-table. There is the 
temptation to the merchant to trade beyond his 
capital ; to the banker or broker to speculate in 
various securities ; to the man of property to hve 
expensively and beyond his income. But no one will 
argue hence that commercial pursuits or good invest- 
ments, or the possession of private means, are in them- 
selves evils ; properly employed, they are blessings. 
And thus we return to the point from which we set 
out, viz. : that ca.rd- playing, in common with almost all 
occupations and araufements, may be wisely and 
honestly used, or foolishly and wickedly abused. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



43 



ON THE ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF 
CARDS AND CARD-GAMES. 



" Di quelle carte, e di quel mazzo strano, 
L'origine cercando, e il primo arcane." 

— II Gioco delle Carte, 

Bettinelli, Poema, Canto 1. 

** II est impossible de dire, prenant un jeu quelconque, qu'il a ete 
invente en telle annee. par un tel. C'est tantot I'un et tantot I'autre 
qui s'avise ajouter quelques rfegles a un vieux jeu, d'en changer le 
nom ; des amis adoptent ; quelques soci^tes a la suite, et voila una 
invention." — Les Cartes ajouer, Paul Boiteau D'Ambly. 

" 'Spect I growed."— in Uncle Tom's Cabin. 



AccoRDiNGr to the best authorities there is no trust- 
worthy evidence of the existence of playing-cards 
more than five hundred years ago. Some writers 
have attempted to show that playing-cards were 
anciently known in India and China, whence they 
were imported to Europe ; but Merlin and Willshire, 
the most recent authors on the History of Playing- 
Cards, are of opinion that the presence of cards in 
Europe is due to an original invention, and not to 
importation. 

The theory of the oriental origin of cards rests 
mainly on the following grounds : — 



44 



CARD ESSAYS. 



1. That cards were known among the Arabs, Sara- 
cens, or Moors, who introduced them into Europe by 
way of Spain. Covelluzzo, who wrote about the end 
of the fifteenth century, is reported by Feliciano 
Bussi {Istoria della Cittd di Viterho, History of the 
City of Viterbo, Roma, 1743) to have stated as follows : 
— Amio 1379,, f it recato in Viterbo il gioco delle 
Carti, die venne de Seracenia e chiamasi tra loro 
Naib,''' that is, '' In the year 1379, was brought into 
Viterbo the game of Cards, which comes from the 
country of the Saracens, and is with them called 
Kaib.''' The assertion of the Saracenic origin of 
cards has no value beyond that of the personal 
opinion of Covelluzzo, or of an opinion prevalent 
when he wrote. Covelluzzo was not contemporaneous 
with the date mentioned, for his Chronicle terminates 
in 1480, a century later than the date he gives. 
Moreover, Covelluzzo, though followed and quoted 
by Bussi, was by him regarded as a credulous person. 

2. That cards made their way into Europe from 
India, by means of the Grypsies, who carried cards 
with them for the purpose of divination and fortune- 
tilling, and that the Moors obtained cards from the 
Grypsies. 

The answer to this supposition is that the Grypsies 
(whether they are of Egyptian origin, or whether 
they sprung from the Suders of Hindustan who 
migrated at the period of Timur Beg) did not appear 
in Europe before 1417, when cards had been in use 
for some time. 

3. That cards had their source in Egypt. 

Those who adopt this view recognize in Tarots 
cards the pages of a hieroglyphic book, containint> 



CARD ESSAYS. 



45 



the principles of the mystic philosophy of the Egyp- 
tians in a series of symbols and emblematic figures. 
But modern criticism has shown that this theory, 
however ingenious, is of too recondite and shadowy a 
character to admit of satisfactory argument. 

4. That cards were invented by the Chinese. The 
principal evidence in favor of this dotitrine is con- 
tained in the Chinese dictionary Ching-tsze-tung , 
compiled byEul-koung, and first published A. D. 1678. 
It is there stated that the cards now known in China 
as Teen-tsze-pae, or dotted cards, were invented in 
the reign of Seun-ho, 1120. According to tradition 
they were devised for the amusement of Seun-ho's 
numerous concubines. 

Even granting that cards had an early and separate 
birth in the Celestial Empire, Europe no more derived 
her cards from China, than she did her gunpowder, 
printing, and engraving, all of which are considered 
by some to have been originally Chinese inventions. 

o. That cards bear an analogy and relation to 
Chess, which is of Eastern, probably Hindustani, 
origin. 

These analogies, when examined, are insufficient to 
establish a common origin. The game of Tchaturanga 
(the four angas or members of an army), or Tchaturaji 
(the four Rajahs or Kings), which is a kind of Chess, 
was played by four persons, with four suits or sets of 
men. The moves were determined by means of dice, 
thus making the game, as at most card-games, a com- 
pound one of chance and skill. But here the analogy 
ends ; and the connection, if any, is ra.ther with 
Backgammon than with cards. 

6. Lastly, that certain Indian cards, and the games 



CARD ESSAYS. 



played with them, present analogies with European 
cards and card-games. This is particularly the case 
with the game of cards known as G-hendifeh . The 
marks of the suits in the cards used, and also the 
rules of the game, have incontestable relations with 
those of the Minchio.te of Florence, and Ombre of 
Spain. C-^hti'idiftli is played with a pack of ninety- 
six cards, of eight suits, containing twelve pieces each. 
Some of the suits, viz. : those of money and swords, 
resemble the suits of European cards. In the division 
of the Hindustani >uits into red and white, we have 
an analogy with the European red and black. In 
the Hindustani game there are eight suits and six or 
three players ; in the European game of Ombre four 
suits and three players. There are also said to be 
other points of similarity between Minchiafe, Ombre, 
and Q-Tiendifeh. 

But. admitting so great a similarity that one game 
may fairly be assumed to have been derived from the 
the other, the inference might be that the Moham- 
medans of India imitated, in their game, the game of 
Europe. For the pectiliarities which link the Eu- 
ropean to the Indian game existed in the former in 
the year 14SS. when cards had been known in Europe 
for at least a century : and Europe had but little 
communication with India until about 1494. It 
must be admitted that this argument is not conclusive, 
as occasional intercourse would be sufficient to in- 
troduce cards. 

M. Merlin, the juror who prepared the report on 
the playing cards sent to the Paris Exhibition of 1855, 
says that " not any historic document, monument, 
nor quotation from Eastern writers, can be adduced 



CARD ESSAYS. 



47 



in support of the theory that cards had either an 
Arabian or Indian origin," and that " an attentive 
study of the various theories of the Oriental origin of 
cards will show they have all been the results of 
imagination, and that the conjectures on which they 
have been based will not bear serious examination.'* 
It is not necessary here to endorse in its entirety 
such a sweeping conclusion. The arguments pro 
and con may be found by those interested in the 
subject in the books specified at the end of this 
Essay. Enough has been said to justify us in as- 
suming the great probability of the European origin 
of cards, and consequently of the games played with 
them. 

Starting then in Europe, the question has to be 
answered. How, when, and where in Europe did cards 
and the games played with them originate ? This 
question has exercised many learned men, and it has 
never been satisfactorily answered. 

The evidence as to the non-existence of playing- 
cards prior to the middle of the fourteenth century, 
is' of course negative. No allusion to cards is to be 
found in the MS. of Hugo von Tiymberg (second half 
of thirteenth and beginning of fourteenth centuries), 
nor in that of Petrarch (first half of fourteenth cen- 
tury), nor in Chaucer (second half of fourteenth cen- 
tury) though in all these writings gambling games 
and implements are mentioned. 

In the Escurial hbrary there is a manuscript com- 
posed by the order of Don Alphonso the Wise, dated 
1331, on the rules of chess and dice. It does not con- 
tain a word about cards. 

To come to positive evidence. The earUest date to 



48 



CARD ESSAYS. 



which it has been proposed to assign the mention of 
cards is 1278 ; but this and all others up to 1375, have 
been shown by the fierce light of modern criticism 
either not to refer to cards, or to be interpolations. 
The earliest direct mention of cards that may be 
accepted without much demur is that in the Chronicle 
of Covelluzzo already referred to. The pfiicht-buch of 
I^urnberg (1380-84) is stated by some authorities to 
contain references to cards. But the earliest date, 
which has never been disputed, and from which the 
positive history of playing-cards begins is the one 
discovered by Pere Menestrier in the registers of the 
Chambres des Comptes of Charles YI. of France, the 
account being that of Charles Poupart, the royal 
Treasurer. In the account commencing 1st February, 
1392, is the following entry: — I)onn4 a Jacquemin 
Gfringonneur, peintre, pour trots jeiix de cartes a or, 
et a diverses couleurs, ornes de plusieurs devises, 
pour porter devant le Seigneur Boi, pour son ebatement 
LVI sols Parisis,'' That is, ''Given to Jacquemin 
Gringonneur, ppJnter, for three packs of cards in 
gold and various colors, and ornamented with 
several devices, to carry before the Lord our King, 
for his amusement, fifty-six sols of Paris." 

The conclusion drawn from this passage, that .card- 
were invented for the use of Charles YI. is unwar- 
rantable ; and so the sneer of Malkin, that it is no 
very favorable specimen of our wisdom to have uni- 
versally adopted an amusement invented for a fool, 
is bereft of its sting. A careful examination of the 
wording shows that the payment was for painting 
not for inventing cards. The general tenor of the 
entry, the simplicity with which it is made, the ab- 



CARD ESSAYS. 



49 



sence of any allusion to novelty in the conception, 
all point to the conclusion that playing-cards were 
already known j and that these cards were executed 
to special order, with more elaborate gilding and 
coipring than usual, as would probably be the case 
mth cards intended for the personal use of royalty. 

There are seventeen pieces in the National Library, 
Paris, which are erroneously called the Grringonneur 
or Charles VI. cards of 1392 . They are in reality fine 
Venetian tarots of the fifteenth century, in the opin- 
ion of some judges not earher than 1425. 

After 1392, many and certain references to playing- 
cards are to be met with. The general conclusion 
arrived at, subject to modification with the extension 
of our present knowledge, is, therefore, that plajring- 
cards were known about the middle of the fourteenth 
century, and that they originated in Europe. 

In the opinion of the latest authorities on the sub- 
ject, there existed, for a considerable period before 
the invention of playing-cards, a series of emblematic 
pictures called naiMs, the raison d'etre of which is 
not known with any certainty, but which are siip- 
posed to have been used either for simple amusement 
and instruction or for the purposes of divination and 
sortilege. And, it is further supposed, that about 
the end of the fourteenth century some inventive 
genius, probably Venetian, selected a certain number 
of these emblematic naiMs, and, by adding to them 
a series of numeral cards, converted them into imple- 
ments by which the excitement of chance and the 
interest of gain might be added to or might super- 
sede the amusement attorded by the original naihis. 

There is much conjecture in this theorv, — but as it 
4 



50 



CARD ESSAYS. 



is the latest, and is supported by good authority, it 
may pass muster until some better explanation is 
offered. 

Towards the end of the fourteenth century it is said 
that these mixed naihis and numerals (called tarots) 
were produced in Italy, Venice (or possibly Florence) 
being assumed as the city of their first appearance. 
The pack consisted of seventy-eight cards. Twenty- 
two were emblematic pieces, some of the original 
^a^&^5 being retained, and others of amoral character 
(bearing directly on the dangers and consequences of 
gambling) being introduced. Fifty-six were numeral 
pieces, divided into four suits of fourteen cards each, 
each suit consisting of ten pip cards, numbered from 
one to ten, and of four picture or coat cards (after- 
wards corrupted into G0U7't cards), viz.: — King, queen, 
cavalier, and man-servant. From Italy playing- 
cards spread rapidly through Europe, but with va- 
rious modifications. 

The number of cards in the pack was frequently 
altered, and ere long the emblematic series was with- 
drawn altogether, except where it was required for 
the old Tarots game, which still lingers in some parts 
of Europe. 

The marks of the suits have been the subject of 
much curious speculation. The received notion about 
them is that they were originally emblematic, and 
that they represented symbohcaUy two theologic and 
two cardinal virtues. The earliest marks were cups^ 
representing Faith ; money for Charity j swords for 
Justice ; and clubs for Fortitude. 

There are other theories respecting the meaning of 
the marks of the suits ; but it seems not improbable 



CARl) ESSAYS. 



51 



that they meant nothing at all, and were simply 
chosen from a variety of common objects, as being 
distinct, well known, and intelligible to all. But 
whether emblematic or not they were very soon 
changed when cards passed the Italian border. Each 
nation, except the Spaniards who retained the old 
signs, seemed to have its own idea as to the marks it 
preferred for its cards. The Germans at a very early 
period employed hearts, bells, leaves and acorns. 
About the second quarter of the fifteenth century the 
French introduced what we choose to call spades, 
hearts, clubs and diamonds, and these marks were 
adopted in England. 

The meaning of the words spades and clubs, and 
their application to the symbols to which they cor- 
respond, have exercised the ingenuity of many wri- 
ters ; the following explanation seems to be the most 
probable. The spade symbol is the grim, or leaf of 
'the Grerman marks, the leaf of the wild plum. In 
adopting it, the French called it pique, as is beheved 
from a fancied resemblance to the head of a pike. 
When we took it from the French, we renamed it 
spade, borrowing the French symbol and the Italian 
name for the suit of swords (spade) . The English club 
is remarkably like the German acorn, as any one may 
see Avho will compare the acorn on the old German 
cards with the trefle of old French ones. As drawn 
on modern cards, the symbol has the shape of a tre- 
foil leaf, and hence the French name. Here again 
the English copied the French symbol, and gave it 
an Italian name, only Anglicizing it. The name of 
the Italian suit is hastoni (batons or clubs). The 
Italian symbol is precisely the same in appearance as 



52 



CARD ESSAYS. 



the club with which Jack the Giant-Killer is armed 
in children's story books. The names of the suits in 
early cards may thus be arranged with regard to 
Their countries: — 



Italian . 




Spade. 


Bastoni. 


Danari. 




. Cups. 


Swords. 


Batons. 


Money. 


Spajs^ish . 


. Copas. 


Espadas. 


Bastos. 


Oros or Dineros. 


German . 


Hertzen. 


Griiii. 


Eicheln. 


Schellen. 




. Hearts. 


Leaves. 


Acorns. 


Bells. 


French . 


. Coeurs. 


Piques. 


Trefles. 


Carreaux. 


English . 


. Hearti^^. 


Spades. 


Clubs. 


Diamonds. 



The precise nature of the earliest games played is 
not known with any certainty. In' the game of 
TaroocM, according to the oldest accounts, three prin- 
cipal elements may be perceived. 1. The superiority 
of the emblematic cards to those of other suits. This 
would naturally suggest itself in consequence of 
their being picture cards, and therefore more striking 
to the eye than numerals. They soon acquired a 
distinctive name, i trionfi (cards of triumph, or 
trumps) or atutti (above all, afterwards in French, 
atouts)' 2. The winning of one card by another of 
superior numerical value, or trick-making. 3. Obliga- 
tion to follow suit and to win the cards previously 
Xjlayed i.e., to take the trick, if able. 

In other Ta^rots games such as MincJiiate, se- 
quences become a scoring element, i.e., the score is 
affected by certain combinations of cards held in 
hand, irrespective of play. This feature, varied in- 
definitely, afterwards appears in many games of skill, 
as in scores for point, quart orze, and special rewards 
for certain privileged cards. 

When the tarots or emblematic cards were rejected, 



CARD ESSAYS. 



53 



trumps were determined by making one suit superior 
to the others. As the cards varied so did the games. 
In games of pure chance, such as Lansquenet, the 
results depend simply on the order in which the cards 
are dealt ; and this principle lies at the root of all 
card-games of chance to the present day. 

Later card-games of skill are all based on omission 
or variation of some of the features already pointed 
out, with the addition of other insignificant subsidi- 
ary ones too numerous to specify. The mode of pro- 
ducing excitement was constantly varied by the in- 
troduction of different methods of staking. At first 
the mode was to make a pool by subscription among 
the players. Then betting was added, in the form of 
vying on or backing the hands ; and a necessary ac- 
companiment of this was to permit discarding, or 
changing worthless cards in hand for undealt cards, 
in hope of increasing the value of the hand betted 
upon, and also to allow the players to play or pass 
as they pleased, generally on pain, if they passed, of 
forfeiting the sum already staked. Then, as a varia- 
tion, the amount to be won or lost was made indefi- 
nite, as at games where points are played for. In 
short, the greatest ingenuity has been exercised in 
order to add to the excitement of play by introducing 
variety, and sometimes senseless variety. A curious 
instance of this, with regard to trick-making games, 
was first pointed out by Dr. Pole. When a new 
game was invented, the order of the cards seems to 
have been varied, with the remarkable consequence 
that, in no game where trick-making is a feature 
does the natural order of the cards prevail. To quote 
Dr. Pole ''On the Philosophy of Grames at Cards " 



54 



CARD ESSAYS. 



{The Field, Dec. 20, 1873) The natural order of 
the cards is the king, highest, then the queen, knave, 
ten, nine, and so on down to the ace, which is natu- 
rally the lowest of all ; but oddly enough, there is 
not, so far as we recollect, a single game where cards 
compete with each other in trick-making, in which 
this natural order is preserved. In whist, as we know, 
the lowest card for playing is put in the highest posi- 
tion, while for cutting it remains the lowest. In 
piquet it is highest both for cutting and playing. In 
ecarte the ace is put between the knave and the ten. 
In bezique and sixty-six the ten ranks between the 
ace and the king. In put and calabrasella the three 
is the best card ; in euchre the knave is best in trumps, 
the ace in other suits ; while in spoil-five the rank 
and order of the different cards in black and red 
suits, and in trump and plain suits, is absurdly 
complex, the five being the best trump, then the 
ace of hearts whatever suit is trumps, and so on. 
Now, the philosophy of this feature is well worth 
study. Eveiy reflecting person must be aware that 
all these distinctions are mere shams ] the playing of 
the games would be precisely the same without the 
changes in the rank of the cards j but these changes 
are so firmly rooted in the constitution of the several 
games, that it would be impossible to eradicate them. 
Suppose, for example, that I\Ir. Clay, when writing 
his work on whist, had began by saying that it was 
a puerile absurdity to make the lowe.-t r-:r d capture 
the highest, and had proposed to revert to the natural 
rank of the cards, basing all his directions and illus- 
trations on that plan. He would have had reason 
on his side ; but he would simply have been treated 



CARD ESSAYS. 



55 



by the whist world as a madman, and his book would 
have shared the fate of De La Rue's memorable 
attempt to make the kings, queens, and knaves look 
like reasonable figures — it would have been igno- 
miniously banished from all decenl^ whist society. 
What is the explanation of this ? " 

Assuming that the original game of all was the 
TaroccM of Venice, played with seventy-eight cards 
(fifty-six numerals and twenty- two tarots), the first 
alteration was probably made by the Florentines, 
who increased the emblematic pieces to forty-one, 
and invented the game of MincMate with ninety- 
seven cards. After this all the changes in the pack 
were in the direction of reduction, it being probably 
found that packs consisting of so many cards were 
awkward to handle. Accordingly, a little later, the 
Bolognese diminished the pack to sixty-two (twenty- 
two tarots and forty numerals) the two, three, four 
and five of each suit being rejected. The game 
played with these cards was called Tarocchino. And 
the Venetians themselves, at a very early period, 
abolished all the true tarots and suppressed the three, 
four, five, and six of each suit (the pack now consist- 
ing of forty cards), and termed the game played with 
these packs Trappola. 

When cards travelled through Europe, the tarots 
cards found comparatively but little favor, the ugh 
to this day tarots cards may be iDrocured in Italy and 
in the south of France. Trappola cards [Drapiilir 
Karten) are also still published at Vienna. But the 
vast majority of packs soon came to consist of fifty-, 
two numeral cards, one f the four coat cards being 
removed from each suit. It seems not unlikely that 



56 



CARD ESSAYS, 



on the loss of one of the pictures the ace was raised 
to its present rank, instead of the ten, in order to 
preserve the original number of cards of superior dig- 
nity. If so, this accounts for the lowest card rank- 
ing as the highest in so many games. At all events, 
this suggestion is thrown out as a possible answer to 
Dr. Pole's question. 

With these fifty-two cards, some being occasionally 
suppressed, various countries invented, in the sense 
explained in the quotation from Paul Boiteau which 
heads this essay, and established their several games. 
No nations seemed content to adopt en hloo any game, 
as it travelled to them. Though the varieties inti'o- 
duced T^-ere marvellously ingenious and numerous, 
the old fundamental elements were maintained, in 
most instances so closely that there is no great diffi- 
culty in tracing the x^edigrees of the principal modei*n 
games, owing to their easily recognized family like- 
nesses to older ones. 

In order to do this it will be desirable to start with 
the early games, and to trace their successive develop- 
ments until the games now in vogue are reached. 

In a Canzone of Lorenzo de Medici, Flush {il Friisso) 
and Bassett are referred to. The date of the Canti 
OarnascialesGhV in which ihi^ Co.nzone appears is 
doubtful ; but it is among the writer's early composi- 
tions. He died in 1492 . 

It may be assumed from the name il Frusso, that 
a flush (cards of the same suit) was one of the objects, 
or the principal object striven after by the players. 
No doubt this game was an early edition of Primero. 
Baretti's Italian Dictionary (Florence, 1832), under 
Frusso says, What we noAv call Primiera and the 



CARD ESSAYS. 



57 



English Primero." It should rather be the Spanish, 
for Primero is only the Spanish form of the Italian 
Primiera. At Primiera a flush is the most important 
hand. Primero is undoubtedly a very old game, of 
either Italian or Spanish origin. It is mentioned by 
Berni {Capitolo del Gioco della Primiera, 1526) with 
Bassetta, il Frusso, Tarocchi, Sminchiate, and other 
games. Seymour (Compleat Gamester, 1734) says 
Ombre is an improvement of Primero " formerly in 
great Vogue among the Spaniards.'' But Primero 
has no relation to Ombre, and it seems more likely 
that the Spaniards derived Primero from the Italian 
Frusso or Primiera, than the reverse. Primero is sup- 
posed by some to have been the oldest game played 
with numeral cards ; but it is now pretty well accer- 
tained that Trappola was earher, and so also prob- 
ably were Flush and Bassett, as the simpler games 
would naturally precede the more complex ones. 

Primero was played in various ways and with packs 
of different degrees of completeness. Thus in Florence 
the sevens, eights, and nines, were removed from the 
pack ; in Rome they were kept. 

The principal features of the game (as nearly as can 
be made out from old descriptions, which are very 
obscure), were as follows : — Four cards were dealt to 
each player, and the rest was made or set at the second 
card. This probably means that, when two cards 
had been dealt, a pool was formed, and then the 
other two cards were dealt. The first player might 
either stand or pass. If he passed, he was at Uberty 
to discard one or two of his cards, and so on with the 
others. 

Any player having a good hand vyed on it, i.e., 



58 



CARD ESSAYS. 



raised the stakes, and finally the hands were shown. 
The principal hands were 1 flush, 2 prime, 3 point. 
The highest flnsh was the best, then the highest prime 
(all four cards held being of different suits) ; and if 
there was no flush or prime, the highest point won. 
The point was thus reckoned ; seven (best card) 
counted for 21 ; six for 18 ; five for 15 ; four for 14 ; 
three for 13 ; two for 12 ; ace for 16 ; coat cards, 10 
each. Also, if agTeed, quinola, knave of hearts, might 
be made any card or suit. Another variation, prob- 
ably of later introduction, was that four cards of a 
sort, as four sevens, were superior to a flush. 

Primera was i3layed also in France. It is included 
by Rabelais in the list of games that Grargantua play- 
ed, under the name of la Prime. The celebrated his- 
tory was finished about 1545 ; but a portion of it was 
published earlier. ' 

In France, the game of Prime, elaborated, appears 
to have been played under the name of V AmMgu ou le 
Mesle. La liaison cles j£iix Academiques (Paris, 1665) 
says," Le MesU s'appelle tant parce quHl tient en 
effet quelque chose de tous lesaiitres, et qu'enlewyant 
jouer on ne saurait discerner si & est prime on autre 
semNaNe.^^ In later editions of the Academy it is called 
V AmMgu or the Banquet (literally a banquet of meat 
and fruit both together — repas ou Von sert envieme 
temps la mande et le fruit), and is stated to be an 
assemblage of different sorts of games. It Avas played 
with forty cards, all the figured cards being thrown 
out. Two cards were dealt to each player. The 
players then stood or passed ; if the latter, they dis- 
carded one or both of their cards, and had others in 
exchange. The pool was next put down, and two 



CARD ESSAYS. 



59 



more cards dealt to each player. Each then exam- 
ined his hand and either stood or passed. Any one 
that stood might say va or go, and increase his stake 
or go better. If no one else increased the stake to 
equal the amount already gone, the person who 
backed his hand took the pool. But if two or more 
players chose to make vade, each of them might dis- 
card again or not, and then each that stood ixdght 
pass or make the renvi, that is go better again. If 
no one stood the re7ivii the player making it won. 
If any stood it they were at liberty to renvier once 
more ; and, the stakes of those who stood the second 
renvi now being equal, the hands had to be shown. 
The winner took the pool the vade and the renms, 
and in addition certain payments from each of the 
other players, whether they stood the game or not. 
The fredon, four cards of the same denomination, was 
the best hand, next flush-sequence (four cards of the 
same suit in sequence), next tricon (three cards of the 
same denomination), combined with_prime (four cards 
of different suits), then flush, tricon, sequence, prime, 
and lastly point. Point was two or three cards of the 
same suit, the highest point being that which con- 
tained the most pips. 

Primero was also played in England. Shakespeare 
represents the King (Henry VIIL, act v. sc. i) as 
playing Primero with the Duke of Suffolk, and the 
game was fashionable in the time of Elizabeth. In 
J. Florio's Second Frutes (1591) the following de- 
scription of Primero occurs : — " S. — Goe to, let us play 
at Primero then. * * * A. — Letusagi-ee ofourGrame. 
What shall we plaie for? S. — One Shilling stake 
and three rest. A. — AgTeede, goe to, discarde. S.--I 



60 



CARD ESSAYS. 



vye it ; will you hould it ? A. — Yea, sir, I hould it 
and revye it ; but dispatch. S. — ^Faire and softly, I 
praie you. 'Tis a great matter. I cannot have a 
chiefe carde. A. — And I have none but coate cardes. 
S. — Will you put it to me ? A. — You bid me to losse. 
S. — Will youswigg? A. — 'Tis the least part of my 
thought. S. — Let my rest goe then, if you please. 
H.— I hould it. What is your rest? S.— Three 
crownes and one third, showe. What are you ? A. — I 
am four and fiftie ; and you ? S. — Oh I filthie luck ; 
I have lost it one ace." 

The word revye" here gives a clue to the etymol- 
ogy of the word "vie." Some modern dictionaries 
say it is of uncertain etymology, and suggest the 
Grerman wag en, to wager. Bailey gives "E.evy, ren- 
vier, F." Revye is evidently the French renvi used at 
the game of AmMgu- Why should not^'vye" be 
the same word adapted to the English language, bj'- 
omitting the duplicating syllable ? 

Later than the sixteenth century, a bastard kind of 
Primero, called Post and Pair, was much played in 
the West of England. A pack of fifty-two cards was 
used. When Cotton wrote {Compleat Gamester, 1674) 
he described the game as under : — " This i)lay depends 
much upon daring ; so that some may win very con- 
siderably, who have the boldness to adventure much 
upon the Vye, although their cards are very indiffer- 
ent." 

* ' You must first stake at Post, then at Pair ; after 
this deal two cards apiece, then stake at the Seat, and 
then deal the third Card about. The eldest hand 
may pass and come in again if any of the Gramesters 
vye it." 



CARD ESSAYS. 



61 



Post would appear to have been the point, the best 
cards being two tens and an ace, counting one-and- 
twenty. A pair royal (three of a kind) beat every- 
thing else, and wins all, both Post, Pair and Seat." 
What seat is, Cotton does not explain. It seems to 
have been a third stake won by the player who held 
the best card out of those last dealt, as was the case 
at the sister game of Brag. 

Vying continued until all your antagonists were 
daunted and brought to submission. But If all the 
Gramesters keep in till all have done, and by consent 
shew their Cards, the best Cards carry the game. !N"ow, 
according to agreement, those that keep in till last, 
may divide the stakes, or show the best Card for it." 

The more modern game of Brag is evidently Post 
and Pair with variations. It was played at least as 
early as Hoyle's time, for Hoyle wrote A short 
Treatise of the Game of Brag " in 1751. It was play- 
ed with fifty- two cards. The players laid down three 
stakes apiece, one for the best whist card turned up 
in the deal (this is probably the seat " of the older 
game) ; a second for the best brag hand (pair) ; and 
a third for obtaining thirty-one, or the number near- 
est to it (post). Three cards were dealt to each player, 
the last one all round being turned up, to decide the 
first stake. The next stake was won by the best brag 
hand, or by the boldest player in backing his hand. 
Two cards, viz. : knave of clubs and nine of diamonds 
(according to Hoyle three braggers), were made fa- 
vorite cards, and were entitled to rank as any card, 
Uke the quinola at Primero, natural pairs or natural 
pairs royal, however, taking precedence of artificial 
ones. Any player saying I brag," and increasing 



32 



CARD ESSAYS. 



his stake, won, if no one answered with a similar or 
larger deposit. If any one answered, the bragging 
continued as at Post and Pair, till one would brag no 
more or made the stakes equal and called a show. 
After Hoyle's date, flush-sequences, flushes, and se- 
quences were added to the hands that might win in 
bragging. 

For the third stake the players could draw cards 
from the stock to increase the T)c>hit ; but anyone 
over-drawing lost his chance. 

It only remains to observe that the game of Poker, 
originally played on the other of the Atlantic, with 
fifty-two cards, may be described as developed Brag. 
The stakes for highest card and point are omitted, 
and the whole game consists in bragging or ' * going 
better " on the ha,nds dealt or taken after discarding. - 
Each player has five cards, and some winning com- 
binations of cards are adopted from Ambigu, Primero, 
or Brag. The winning hands are as follows, in order : 
straight flush (a flush combined with a sequence), fours 
(four cards of a kind with one outside card), fulls 
(three cards of one denomination and a pair), flush 
five cards of the same suit not in sequence), straight 
(a sequence not all of the same suit), triplets (three 
cards of the same denomination, the other two cards 
not being a pair), two pairs, one pair, and highest 
card. It has quite recently been the fashion to play 
with a xoack of thirty-tAVO cards, the cards from the 
deuce to the six (both inclusive) being thrown out. 

It is curious that the game of Poker, by many con- 
sidered a new game, should be traceable to a game 
at least four hundred years old. 

Thus, Flush becomes Prim'era, Primero, or Prime. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



63 



Prime is modified into Ambigu. The offshoots of the 
last are Post and Pair and Brag. And lastly, throw- 
ing back" more nearly in some respects to the parent 
games, Poker, now a national game in America, is 
invented. 

In Germany the game of Lansquenet, under the 
name of LandsknecMspiel, played with fifty-two 
cards, was a favorite, and by some authorities is 
called the national Grerman card-game. It is said by 
Bettinelli, in the notes to the second canto of the 
poem already quoted, to have been a kind of Bassett 
or Faro (both very ancient) ander another name. 
All these are mere games of chance, with an advan- 
tage to the dealer or holder of the bank. Of games 
of chance Lansquenet is about the simplest, depend- 
ing only on whether a card of one denomination is 
turned up before a card of another denomination. It 
is, in fact, hardly a game at all, but merely a com- 
plicated way of playing pitch-and-toss with cards in- 
stead of coins ; and this remark applies to every 
chance game from Bassett to Rouge-et-noir. In Ger- 
many, Lansquenet seems to have been the most usual 
pitch-and-toss card-game ; but to elevate it to the 
dignity of a national card-game, is to treat it with a 
respect it does not deserve. 

Spain is credited with the invention of several games. 
Her claim to the invention of Primero has already 
been noticed \ but i^reference has been given to the 
view that Primero is only the Spanish rendering of 
the Italian Primiera. La Gana pierde was an early 
and popular game, and is no doubt the same game 
as Coquimbert (evidently a corruption of qui gagne 
perd), mentioned in the Gargantua Ust. In France 



64 



CARD ESSAYS. 



a very similar, if not the same, game was called Re- 
versis, just as there Primero, with a difference, was 
re-christened Ambigu. In the Academie des Jeiix it 
is said that Reversis was originally Spanish, and that 
it was called Reversis because (in some respects) it 
was the reverse of all other games. If played in Eng- 
land it might have been under another name ; Cot- 
grave says that a card game called Loosing-lodam 
(formerly played in England) was very similar to 
Reversis, and Urquhart translates the Coquimhert 
of Rabelais by losing load him," probably a mis- 
print for Losing-lodam. Modern Hoyles (including 
additional games not w^ritten by Hoyle) contain Re- 
versis ; but no one ever seems to play at it. 

lie versis was played with forty-eight cards, the 
tens being thrown out from a complete pack. Many 
old Spanish packs contain no tens j and comparing 
this fact with those previously stated, the conclusion 
seems irresistible that La G-ana pierde, alias Coquim- 
bert, alias Reversis, was the game for which they 
w^ere intended. 

The national game of Spain was and is Ombre, It 
is played by three persons with forty cards, the tens, 
nines, and eights being discarded. It is a very 
complicated game, and, on that account alone, one 
would suppose it must have had a simpler prede- 
cessor. But none of the writers on the subject 
have discovered any similar earlier and less complex 
game. It introduces an entirely new feature, viz. : 
that of playing with a partner or ally, instead of, as 
in the older games, every man's hand (in two senses) 
being against every one else's. 

Ombre is a game of great merit, and was much 



CAHD ESSAYS. 



(55 



played at one time in France and England. Modifi- 
cations of it also were invented, viz. : Ombre a deux, 
Tredille, Quadrille (four players), Quintille {five 
players), Sextille (six players), and Mediateur^ or 
Preference, which again has v^ariations such as Soli- 
taire and Piquemedrille. TresilUo and Rocambor, 
much played in Spanish South America, are simply 
Ombre except in the mode of marking. 

The invention of Piquet is generally attributed to 
France. It is called by Rabelais both le Piquet and 
le Cent ; and the same game under the name of Cientos 
was known very early in Spain. 

There is yet another possible derivation df Piquet, 
viz. : from a German source. Speaking of German 
cards, Merlin says, ' ' For figures we meet kings, supe- 
rior and inferior valets. * The pip cards are ten, 
nine, eight, seven, six and two, a composition resem- 
bling our own Piquet, in which the ace has been dis- 
placed by the two. This structure is * that of the 
Saxon game Scliwerter Karte — cartes a Vepee. What 
appears to confirm our conjecture as to the analogy of 
Piquet with this jeu a Vepee is the fact that in the 
modern cards, manufactured at Vienna, for playing 
the German game * * * the six is suppressed as 
it is in the French piquet- cards since the end of the 
seventeenth century." 

It is possible, too, that this may furnish a clue to 
the etymology of Piquet, a point much disputed. 
The sword of the Italian and Spanish cards is equiva- 
lent to the pique or spade of the French cards. Y/hat 
more likely than that Piquet is the French name of 
tne Bchwerter, or Sword-game? It has often been 
suspected that Piquet is in some wav connected with 

5 



66 



CARD ESSAYS. 



pique, but for what reason has never been clearly 
made out. Piquet, under the name of Sant, a corrup- 
tion of Cent, was played in England until nearly the 
n^iddle of the seventeenth century, when the French 
name of Piquet was adoi^ted,. contemporaneously 
with the marriage of Charles I. to a French Princess. 

It is, further, not unlikely that Piquet is a devel- 
oped form of Ronfa, a game included in Berni's list. 
This is in all proba^bility the same game as la Ronfle 
included in Rabelais' list. If these have no connec- 
tion with Piquet, it is at least a remarkable coinci- 
dence that the point at Piquet (one of the most im- 
portant features in the game), was anciently called 
Ronfle. 

Whether or not the Fi-ench national game was a 
development of the German Sword-game, or of Ronfa 
and Cientos, it certainly, under the name of Piquet, 
became identified with France. Prior to the end of 
the seventeenth century the game of Cientos, Cent, 
Sant or Piquet was played with a pack of thirty-si:s: 
cards, the twos, threes, fours and fives being left out ; 
the sixes were then also withdrawn, and only thirty- 
two cards used, as at present. 

Ecarte may also be regarded as a game especially 
French. As now played it is of quite recent inven- 
tion ; but its earlier forms may be traced back to the 
time of Berni. He includes in his list Trionfl, which 
may be assumed to be the game called Trionfo in 
Spain (mentioned by Vives, a Spaniard, d. 1541, in 
liis Dialogues " under the name of TriumpJius His- 
panicus). There can be little doubt but that these 
games are closely related to la Triomphe of Rabelais. 

Triomphe was played in several ways, either tete-a- 



CARD ESSAYS. 



67 



t<-tei or with partners, or as a round game. A ]3iquet- 
pack was used, the ace ranking between the knave 
and ten. Five cards were dealt to each player, by 
two and by three at a time, and the top card of tlie 
stock was turned up for trumps. The playei-s were 
obliged to win the trick if able. The player or side 
that won three tricks marked one point ; the winners 
of the vole, two points. The game was usually five 
up. If one side or player was not satisfied, they might 
offer the point to the adversary. If he refused, he 
was bound to win the vole or to have two scored 
against him. 

The same game was played in England, and is de- 
scribed by Cotton under the name of French-Ruff'. 
It appears from Cotton that the players might discard 
(though the passage is rather obscure), and offering 
the point is absent from his account of the game. 

The family likeness of Triomphe or French-Ruff to 
Ecarte scarcely needs pointing out. The main dif- 
ference is the addition of a score for the king at 
Ecarte. 

The French settlers in America took Triomphe with 
them, and transformed it into Euchre, now a na- 
tional game in the States. 

The game of Triomphe or French-Ruff must not be 
confused with the English game of Trump or Ruff- 
and-Honors, the predecessor of our national game of 
Whist. Cotton clearly distinguishes between the two , 
calling Triomphe, French-UMS: (ruff and trump be- 
ing synonymous), and Trump, Miglish-^n^'find 
Honors. 

Trump seems to have been entirely of English 
origin ; at least no mention of it occurs in continen- 



68 CARD ESSAYS. 



tal books on games, the nearest approach to it behig 
les Honneurs mentioned by Rabelais. Trump was 
played in England as early as the beginning of the 
sixteenth century. The game of Ruff-and-Honors, b;/ 
some called Slamm, was probably the same game, 
or, if not, a similar game with the addition of a score 
for honors. It was played by four persons, with 
fifty- two cards, twelve cards being dealt to each and 
four left in the stock, the top card of which was 
turned up for trumps. The holder of the ace of trumps 
ruffed, i.e., he put out four cards and took in the 
stock. The game was nine up, and at the jDoint of 
eight, honors could be called as at long Whist. 

The game, with a shght modification, was after- 
wards called Whisk or Whist. In Taylor's " Motto " 
(1621), Whisk is one of the games enumerated. This 
is the earliest known mention of the game in print, 
and it is to be observed that it is spelt Whisk, not 
Whist. Cotton spells it both ways (see p. 73). In 
the Comx^leat Gamester, 1674, he says that '' Whist is 
a game not much differing from this {i.e., Rufl'-and- 
Honors], only they put out the Deuces and take in 
no stock." The trump was the bottom card, and 
rhe game was nine up. Whist, then, was originally 
played with forty-eight cards, and the odd-trick, that 
important feature in the modern game was, of course, 
wanting. 

Not long after this the game was made ten up. - 
Cotton, ed. 1799, says the points were ' " nine in all ; 
ed. 1721, "ten in ail;" ed. 1725, nine in all;" 
Seymour, ed. 1734, with which Cotton was incorpor- 
ated, ten in all ; " and it may be assumed that, 
simultaneously with this change, the practice of play- 



CARD ESSAYS. 



69 



ing -with fifty-two cards obtained. While Whist was 
undergoing these changes, it was occasionally played 
with swabbers or swobbers, certain cards, (not the 
honors), which entitled the holder to a stake inde- 
pendently of the general event of the game. 

After the swabbers were dropped, our national 
card game having been known as Trump, Ruff-and 
Honors, Slam, Whisk, and Whist-and-Swabbers, 
finally became Whist. Whist it was when Edmoxd 
HoYLE wi-ote (A Short TREATISE On the GtAME of 
WHIST. By a CtE^S'tlemax, 1742), and Whist it 
has since remained. The only alterations that have 
been made are the reduction of the game from ten 
up to five up, the introduction of the treble game, 
and the abolition of calling honors. The laws were 
also revised in 1864. And lastly, since about 1730, 
when a party of gentlemen used to frequent the 
Crown Coffee House, in Bedford Row, (where they 
studied Whist, and laid down the following rules : 
**Lead from the strong suit; study your partners 
hand ; and attend to the score ; ") the game has been 
greatly elaborated as regards scientific play. So far 
has this been cari'ied that, now, as Clay well remarks, 

Whist is a language, and every card played an in- 
telhgible sentence." 

Whist, a game (so far as is known) of purely Eng- 
lish invention, is now the Bong of Card-Grames, and 
seems destined, for many a long year, to retain that 
distinction. 



70 



CARD ESSAYS. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY. 



Bartsch, Adam. — Le Peintre-Graveur. Leipsic, 
1803, 1821, 1854, 8vo. Vol. vi., p. 55 ; vol. x., pp. 
70-12a: vol. xiii., pp. 120-138. 

SiXGER, Samuel Weller.— Researches into the 
History of Playing- Cards ; with Illustrations of the 
Origin of Printing and Engraving on Wood. London, 
1816. 4to. 

Peig:n'OT, GtABRIEL. — Recherches Historiqnes et 
Litteraires sur les Danses des Morts, et sur TOrigine 
des Cartes a Jouer. Dijon et Paris, 1826. 8vo. 

Cicogxara, Leopoldo. — Memorie spettanti alia 
Storia della Calografia. Prato, 1831. 8vo. 

* Bibliophiles Fraxcais,Societe DES. Jeuxde 
Cartes Tarots, et de Cartes Numerales, du quatorzieme 
au dix-huitieme Siecle. Paris, 1844. Folio. 

* Chatto, William Andrew. — Facts and Specu- 
lations on the Origin and History of Playing-Cards. 
London, 1848. 8vo. 

* Boiteau, Paul (d'Ambly). — Les Cartes a jouer 
et la Cartoinancie. Paris, 1854, and London, 1859. 
Bvo. 

Passavant, J. T>. — Le Peintre-Graveur. Leipsic 
1860. 8vo. Vol. 1., pp. 6, 208, 213, 243 ; vol ii., pp. 66; 



CARD ESSAYS. 



71 



70, 100, 176, 205, 242, 246, 247 ; vol. v., pp. 11, 119, 
126, 129, 132, 134. 

Taylor, Rev. Ed. S. (B.A.), aisd others.— Tlie 
History of Playing-Cards, with anecdotes of their Use 
in Conjuring, Fortune-Telling, and Card-Sharping. 
London, 1865. 8vo. 

(Translated from Paul Boiteau, with numerous ad- 
ditions and alterations). 

Merlin", R. — Origine des Cartes a jouer. R;e- 
cherches Nouvelles sur les ^Taibis, les Tarots, et sur 
les autres Especes de Cartes. Paris, 1869. 4to. 

* WiLLSHiRE, William Hughes (M.D., Edin.).— 
A descriptive Catalogue of Playing and other Cards 
in the British Museum, accompanied by a concise 
general History of the Subject, and remarks on Cards 
of Divination and of a poHtico-historical Character. 
London. 1876. Ryl. 8vo. 

Those marked * contain bibliographical lists. 



72 



CARD ESSAYS. 



OX THE ETYMOLOGY OF WHIST," AND 
OF OTHER WORDS USED IN CON- 
NECTION WITH IT. 



" Et^-mologT has been so unsuccessful in establishhig clear and 
definite principles, or so unfortunate in tlieir application that nianv 
persons regard it as bearing the same relation to grammar as astrology 
does to astromony, alchemy to chemistry, or perpetual niotion to me- 
chanics."— TTelsford. 



The word ''Whist," or more properly ''Whisk," 
is of modern coinage. It does not occur in Shake- 
speare, nor, so far as is known, in any books nntil late 
in the first quarter of the seventeenth century. This 
statement has frequently been i^rinted, and as it has 
never been controverted, its correctness may be as- 
sumed. 

The original form of the word in print was Whisk. 
It occurs, thtts spelt, in "Taylor's Motto," by Taylor, 
the Water-Poet, published in 1621, and this is be- 
lieved to be its first appearance in print. Speaking 
of the prodigal, Taylor says : 

" He flings his money free with carelessnesse. 
At novum, mumchance, mischance (chuse ye which\ 
At one and thirty, or at poore and rich, 
Ruffe, slam, tnimp, nody, whisk, hole. sant. nev/' cut," 



CARD ESSAYS. 



73 



According to The Quarterly Revieio, January, 1871, 

Whisk continued to be spelt with a k for about 

forty years after Taylor's mention of it. The writer 

in The Quarterly says that the earhest known use of 

the word whist, spelt with a t, is in the second part 

of Hudibras (spurious), published in 1663, and quoted 

by Johnson : — 

" But what was this ? A game at Wliist 
Unto our Plowden-Canonist." 

And here, it will be observed, the rhyme requires the 

alteration. 

Later the word was spelt indifferently whisk or 
whist for many years. Cotton (1674) in his descrip- 
tion of the -game, always spells it whist, but in his 
account of Picket " he says the players "follow in 
suit as at Whisk ; " Farquhar (" Beaux's Stratagem," 
1707) spells it whisk ; Pope Epistle to Mrs. Theresa 
Blount," 1715) spells it whisk ; Swift Essay on the 
Fates of Clergymen," 1728) spells it whist ; Thomson 
("Autumn," 1730) spells it whist; Fielding ("His- 
tory of Jonathan Wild the Great," 1754) spells it 
whisk; Grrose ("Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue," 
1785) spells it whist ; the Hon. Daines Barrington 
(*^ Archaeologia," vol. viii., 1787) spells it whisk and 
whist. After this, so far as is known, it is always 
spelt whist. 

Charles Cotton describes Whist in " The Compleat 
Gramester : or Instructions how to play at Billiards, 
Trucks, Bowls, and Chess. Together with all man- 
ner of ubual and most Grentile Games either on Cards 
or Dice. London, 1674." Although he was ac- 
quainted with the form Whisk, as already stated, he 
ignores that in his derivation, saying that the game 



74 



CARD ESSAYS. 



is called Whist from the silence that is to be ob- 
served in the play." 

In 1719, Richard Seymour produced The Court 
Gramester : or full and easy Instructions for playing 
the games now in Vogue, after the best method ; as 
they are Play'd at Court, a.nd in the Assemblies, viz.: 
Ombre, Picquet, and the Royal Game of Chess. 
Written for the Use of the Young Princesses. Lon- 
don." This contains no whist. But about 1734, 
Cotton's and Seymour's books were incorporated, 
with the following title : — The Compleat Gramester : 
In three parts, viz. I. Full and easy Instructions 
for playing the Grames chiefly used at Court and in 
the Assemblees, viz., Ombre, Quadrille, Quintille, 
Picquet, Basset, Faro, and the Royal Game of Chess. 
II. The true Manner of playing the most usual Games 
at Cards, viz.. Whist, All-Fours, Cribbidge, Pat, Lue, 
Brag, &c., with several diverting Tricks upon the 
Cards. III. Rules for playing at all the Games both 
within and without the Tables ; likewise at English 
and French Billiards. Also the Laws of each Game 
annexed to prevent Disputes. London." 

Under Whist we find, Wliist, vulgarly called 
Vfhisk. The Original Denomination of this game is 
Whist : Or, The Silent Game at Ca.rds." And again, 
•' Talking is not allowed at Whist; the very Word 
implies. Hold your Tongue.'' 

Seymour seems to be strangely wrong in this state- 
uient, which he no doubt amphfied from Cotton. 
The original denomination," so far as is known, 
was Whisk ; and if this is admitted all derivations 
from the interjection commanding silence require re- 
consideration. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



75 



Nevertheless, the Whist-silence derivation Tvas sup- 
ported by Johnson and ]S'ares. It is true that Dr. 
Johnson cautiously avoided saying that Whist means 
silence. He defined Whist as a game at Cards, re- 
quiring close attention and silence," and from this it 
may be inferred that he had accepted etymology, but 
that he doubted its accuracy. Is ares, however, in 
his Glossary," rushed in where Johnson feared to 
tread. He well remarks in his preface that he knows 
*'the extreme fallaciousness of the science of etymol- 
ogy when based on mere similarity of sound." But 
under Whist " he forgets his own canon, for he says, 
** That the name of the game of Whist is derived from 
this, is known, I presume, to all who play or do not 
play." 

Other authorities reject the derivation of Whist from 
silence. Dr. E. Cobham Brewer justly wites : — 

It is hardly necessary to state that the vulgar 
etymology of whist," from the interjection meaning 
silence, is wholly vvorthless, because the word is obvi- 
ously a coiTuption of the older form * whisk.' The 
French * Dictionnaire Universel des Sciences, des 
Lettres, et des Arts ' says : — ' Whist del'anglais whist! 
(silence !), parce qu'il est defendu de parler a ce jeu, 
et de faire connaitre meme a son partner le jeu qu'on 
a dans la main.' This is not special to the game of 
whist, but apphes with equal force to the score of 
other games, and even if special cannot be admitted, 
as the word whist is only a corruption of a more an- 
cient name. We will next clear the ground of all 
those languages which cannot have supplied the 
word, and thus reduce the area of research to 
the smallest possible compass. As there is no t^? in 



76 



CARD ESSAYS. 



Greek, Latin. French, Italian, Spanish, &;c., we must 
not look for the word in those languages, at any rate 
either in the form of whist or wMsk ; and, as there 
is no wh in German, we must not look for it in Ger- 
man. Similarly the Scandinavian family of lan- 
guages is excluded, unless, indeed, it is some corrup- 
tion. IN'ow it cannot be a corruption of any Romance, 
German or Scandinavian word, inasmuch as the 
word itself exists in several of the European lan- 
guages, even although they do not possess a tz; or 
w7i. Thus in French we have wMst, although w is 
not a French letter. In German we have whist, al- 
though wh is not a German combination. The same 
may be said of other nations, and we cannot withhold 
the obvious conclusion that the word has been borrow- 
ed by them from the English and naturalized ; or, in 
other words, that the game is a British game, and the 
word mustbe looked forwithin the British dominions." 

The Doctor proposes a Welsh source, gwis, tanta- 
mount to the French invite, lead. Though inge- 
nious, this derivation is said to be philologically 
untenable, because gw " in Welsh, is represented 
by " w " in English, and not by wh." 

Chatto, a very careful writer, suggests in his Facts 
and Speculations " that whisk is derived by substi- 
tution from the word ruff. Ruffs and whisks as ar- 
ticles of dress were practically synonymous. The 
game already had several aliases, viz. : triumph, 
trump, slam, ruff', and ruff-and-honors. At this time 
(middle of the seventeenth century), the game was 
in a transition state, and it seems not unlikely that on 
another alias being added, a word almost synony- 
mous with ruff should be chosen. At all events this 



CARD ESSAYS. 



77 



derivation seems less improbable than any other that 
has been offered. Ruff, as the name of a game, has 
been supposed to have reference to the ruff worn by 
the figures on the coate cards. Buttliis derivation is 
open to argument. 

The following considerations as to the derivation^ 
of ruff, are submitted, not dogmatically, but in hopes 
of contributing to the solution of a disputed and dif- 
ficult question. 

Ruff appears at one time to have meant the point at 
Piquet. In Le Royal Jev dv Fiqvet plaisant et 
recreatif,''' Rouen, 1647, the point is called ''ronfle,'' 
The book was translated into Enghsh in 1651, with 
the following title, The Royall and delightful Game 
of Picquet written in French and now rend'red into 
English out of the last French Edition." In this 
book the word ronfle " is translated ruffe.'' Cot- 
ton, in the Compleat Gamester," also calls the point 
the ruff. " After the discarding you must consider 
the Ruff, that is how much you can make of one 
suit." This, however, does not heliD us much. Even 
if ruff is derived from ronfle, how did a word, formerly 
used to signify the ]3oint at Piquet, come to designate 
an English game ? 

At English-Ruff or Ruff-and-Honors, ruffing did not 
necessarily mean trumping, as it does at modern 
Whist. The term was employed in the sense of dis- 
carding. Cotton Comj^leat Gamester "; says, At 
Ruff and Honors, by some called Slamm, you have in 
the Pack all the Deuces, and the reason is, because 
four playing having dealt twelve a piece, there are 
four left for the Stock, the uppermost whereof is 
turn'd up. and that is TrumDS, he that hath the Ace 



78 



CARD ESSAYS. 



of that Ruffs ; that is, he takes in those four cards, 
and lays out four others in their lieu." 

The connection between discarding and so adding 
to the point or ronfle at Piquet (the great object with 
good players), and discarding at Ruff-and-Honors 
and so adding to the number of trumps in hand 
(trump and juff being synonymous as will presently 
appear), is not very remote. One link only is want- 
ing. If it could but be shown that ronfle^' ever meant 
to discard, or rather to add to the roiifle or point by 
discarding and taking in, the chain would be com- 
plete. To assume some such meaning is not more 
violent than the assumption that whisk is derived by 
substitution from ruff ; at all events, in the absence 
of a better theory, this may perhaps be allowed to 
pass muster. 

French-Ruff, or Triomphe (French) was a kind of 
Ecarte, at which discarding was an essential part of 
the game. Here again ruffing and discarding are 
brought face to face. The Game is called French- 
Ruff in the Compleat Gamester," Triomphe in the 

Academie des Jeiix.'' It must not be confounded 
with the Enghsh game of Trump, which, if not the 
same game as Ruff-and-Honors, was, like the latter, 
an imperfect form of Whist. 

The derivation of Trump, the game from which 
Ruff-and-Honors and Whist were derived, is com- 
paratively simple. 

> Trump is a corruption of the word triumph. It 
occurs both in its original and its corrupt form in 
Latimer's sermon ''On the Card," preached at St. 
Edmund's Church, Cambridge, the Sunday before 
Christmas, 1529 : — 



CARD ESSAYS. 



79 



And whereas yoii are wont to celebrate Christ- 
mass in playing at Cards, I intend, by God's Grace, 
to deal unto you Christ's Cards, wherein you shall 
perceive Christ's Rule. The game that we play at 
shall be called the Triumph, which, if it be well played 
at, he that dealeth shall win; the Players shall 
likewise win ; and the standers and lookers upon 
shall do the same ; insomuch that there is no Man 
willing to play at this Triumph with these Cards, 
but they shall be all winners and no losers * ^ * 
You must mark also, that the Triumph must apply to 
fetch home unto him all the other Cards, whatever 
suit they be of ^' '■■ * Then further we must say to 
ourselves, What requireth Christ of a Christian Man ? 
Now turn up your Trump, your Heart (Hearts is 
Trump, as I said before), and cast your Trump, 
your Heart, on this Card." 

There is abundant evidence that trump and 
triumph are the same word. Shakespeare (Antony 
and Cleopatra, Act IV., scene 12), introduces triumph 
in the double sense of a warlike triumph, and of a 
trump card. The passage, containing repeated pun- 
ning allusions to card-playing, leaves no doubt as to 
T he reference to cards in the word triumph. 

Again, Seymour, in the ''Court Gamester," 1719, 
says : — The Term Trump comes from a Corruption 
of the Word Triumph ; for wherever they are, they 
are attended with Conquest." 

How ruff came to be synonymous with trump is 
uncertain. In Cotgrave's ''French and English Dic- 
tionary," 1611, is found Triomphe, The Card Game 
called Ruffe or Trump," and many other authorities 
couple the two words in a similar way, Nares, in his 



80 



CARD ESSAYS. 



Griossary," sayrs : — ''Ruff meant a trump C8ird.,charta 
dominatrix,'' 

Another synonym for Eiiff-and-Honoui^ was Slam» 
This word is now openly applied to the winning of 
every trick, and the usual derivation given is from 
lamen, to smite. It must be admitted, however, that 
this etymology requires further investigation. 

Soon after Ruff-and-Honours acquired the appel- 
lation of Whisk, a term of very strange character, 
viz.: swoJDbers or swabbers became asssociated withit. 
Fielding, in his "History of the Life of the late Mr.- 
Jonathan Wild, the G-reat," records that when the 
ingenious Count La Ruse was domiciled with Mr. 
Geoffrey Snap, in 1682, or, in other words, was in a 
spunging-house, the Count begtiiled the tedium of 
his in-door existence by playing at Whisk-and-Swab- 
bers, the game then in the chief vogue." Svrift also, 
in his Essay on the Fates of Clergymen" (1T2S), ridi- 
cules Archbishop Tenison for not understanding the 
meaning of swabbers. The story goes that a clergy- 
man was recommended to the Archbishop for prefer- 
ment, when His Grrace said. " he had heard that the 
clergyman used to play at Whist and swobbers ; that 
as to playing now and then a sober game at Whist, 
it might be pardoned ; but he could not digest those 
wicked swobbers." Johnson defines swobbers as 
four privileged cards used incidentally in betting at 
Whist." In Captain Francis Gfrose's " Classical Dic- 
tionary of the Ytilgar Tongue" (1785), swabbers are 
stated to be * * The ace of hearts, Imave of clubs, ace 
and duce of trumps at Whist." The Hon. Daines 
Barrington (writing in 1787), says, that at the begin- 
ning of the century, Whisk was played with what 



CARD ESSAYS. 



81 



were called swabbers, which were possibly so termed, 
because they who had certain cards in their hand 
were entitled to take up a share of the stake, inde- 
pendent of the general event of the game." 

No satisfactory etymology of the word swabbers 
can be given. Chatto Facts and Speculations") 
suggests that "the fortunate, clearing the board of 
this extraordinary stake, might be compared by sea- 
men to the Swabbers (or cleaners of the deck) " of a 
vessel. This must be regarded rather as a " Specula- 
tion than as a '' Fact." 

Swabbers, as an adjunct to the game of Whist, 
eventually dropped away. But it seems possible that 
they may still linger in local coteries. Mr. R. B. 
Wormald, writing in CasselPs Popular Recreator," 
in April, 1873, says : — 

Would the giants of the 'Portland' or 'Arling- 
ton ' [now The Turf Club], be surprised to hear that 
in this enlightened nineteenth century the ' swabber ' 
still holds its place in rural Whist, and that we our- 
selves have personally come across the anachronism ? 
The phenomenon occurred in this wise : — Some few 
years ago, in the course of a boating tri^D from Oxford 
to London, we were driven by stress of weather to 
take shelter one summer evening in a sequestered 
hostelry on the Berkshire bank of the Thames, and 
on entering the parlor we were agreeably surprised 
to find four local * Cavendishes ' deeply immersed in 
the ' game of silence,' to the accompaniment of long 
l)ipes. In the middle of the hand, one of the players, 
with a grin that almost amounted to a chuckle, and 
a vast display of moistened thumb, spread out upon 
the table the ace of trumps; whereupon the other three 
6 



83 



CARD ESSAYS. 



deliberately laid clown their hands, and forthwith 
severally handed over the sum of one penny to the 
fortunate holder of the card in question. On inquiry 
we were informed that the process was technically 
known as a * swap ' (qy. * swab ' or ' swabber ')> and 
was de rigueur in all properly constituted w^hist cir- 
cles. Our efforts to elucidate the etymology of the 
term proved unavaihng ; but this is scarcely surpris- 
ing, seeing that the true etymology of hist ' itself 
— though popularly associated with ' silence ' — is a 
very moot point, while the derivation of the word 
* ruff ' or 'to ruff ' is a mystery that, to the best of 
our knowledge, no lexicograiDher has ever succeeded 
in unravelling." 

The extreme obscurity which shrouds the etymol- 
ogy of these various technical terms connected with 
Whist is not less remarkable than the changes of 
name undergone by the game itself. First in order 
comes Triumph or Trump, a game of purely English 
origin, and in no-way connected with the French 
game of la Triomvhe. Trump, possibly with some 
additions or alterations, became converted into Ruff- 
and-Honours, and Slam. Whisk followed, dift'ering 
but little from these. Swobbers were afterwards 
joined on to Whisk, but Whisk-and-Swobbers was 
abandoned, and our national card game became 
simply Whist, under which name it seems likely to 
remain for an indefinite time the King of Card- 
Grames. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



88 



DUTIES ON PLAYING-CAEDS. 



**It is quite right that there should be a heavy duty on Cai'ds."— 

SOUTHEY. 



That Playing-Cards, being articles of luxury, are 
fit objects for the imposition of a duty, is a proposi- 
tion which can hardly be denied. But what the 
amount of the duty should be is by no means clear. 
A high duty checks production, diminishes consump- 
tion, and leads to evasion. Experience renders it 
probable that the present dutj' of 3d. a pack is about 
as high a one as can be borne, without defeating its 
own object, as will appear from the following histor- 
ical sketch. 

A tax was first levied on playing-cards in the reign 
of James I. (1615). In the " Calendar of State Papers,'' 
Domestic Series, A. D. 1611-1618, is the following 
minute :— " 1615, July 20. Westminster.— (19). Lettei-s 
Patent granting to Sir Richard Coningsby, for a rent 
of £200 per annum, the imposition of 5s. per gross 
on playing-cards, and the office of Inspector of all 
playing-cards imported in recompense of £1,800 due 
to him from the King, and of his patent for the sole 
export of Tin, granted by the late Queen." Warrant 
for the above granted Jaly 19. 



84 



CARD ESSAYS. 



The proclamation of this patent is preserved in the 
hbrary of the Society of Antiquaries ; and follo^'ing 
the proclamation is ^'The Copie of the Lord Trea- 
sourers Letter," as under : — After my heartie com- 
mendations; whereby it hath pleased his Majestie to 
direct a Privy Seal to me, touching the imposition of 
five shillings upon every gi'osse of Playing Cards that 
shall be Imported into this Kingdome or the Domin- 
ions thereof by vertue of his Majestie's Letters Patents 
gTanted to Sir Richard Coningsby knight under the 
Grreate Seale of England. In regard whereof These 
are to wil and require you to take notice thereof and 
not to suffer any merchant to make any entry of 
Playing-Cards until the same impositions be payed 
according to the said Letters patents. Provided that 
the Patentees give caution for maintayning the Cus- 
tome and Import according to a Medium thereof to 
be made as in such cases is used : And so having sig- 
nified his Majestie's pleasure to you in that behalfe 
I bid you heartily farewell. 

Your Louing Friend, 

ThO : SUFFOLKE. 

' ' From Northampton House the 
29th of October, 1G15." 

The date usually taken, probably on the authority 
of Singer, for the original taxing of cards is 1631. It 
may be that he confused between the imposition of 
the tax, and the protest against it made in the reign 
of Charles I. The duty on cards was one of the taxes 
then complained of by the Commons "as arbitrary 
and illegal, and being levied without consent of Par- 
liament.'' 

In the reign of Queen Anne playing-cards were first 



CARD ESSAYS. 



85 



subjected to a duty vrith the consent of Parliament. 
In 1710 an act was passed to obtain an annual sum of 
£186,670 as a fund or security for raising a sum of £2 ,- 
602,200, for carrying on the war, and for other her 
Majesty's Occasions." It was enacted that playing- 
cards should pay a duty of sixpence a pack for a term 
of thirty-two years, commencing June 11, 1711. 
Under the act, all makers of cards or dice were re- 
quired to send to the Commissioners of the Stamp 
Duties on Vellum, parchment, and paper, notice in 
writing containing the address of the house or place 
where cards or dice were manufactured . Makers omit- 
ting to send such notice, or manufacturing in houses 
not notified, became liable to a penalty of £50. 
Various other vexatious obligations were imposed, as, 
for example, the makers had to permit the proper 
officers for the duties in question to enter their houses 
of business to take an account of the cards and dice 
there made," on penalty of £10 for every refusal. 
The makers were not. allowed to remove cards from 
the factory until the paper and thread enclosing every 
pack was sealed in such a manner as was satisfactory 
to the Commissioners of Duties, under pain of forfeit- 
ing the goods removed, and treble their value. In ad- 
dition, the card and dice makers were required to make 
entry, upon oath, once in every twenty-eight days of 
the number of cards and dice manufactured by them 
in the interim, and they had to clear within the en- 
suing fortnight the amount of duty then declared due. 
Neglect on these scores was visited by forfeiture of 
£20 for default in making entry, and double duty for 
non-payment of the tax within the specified time. 
The proposal to lay an impost on playing cards en- 



86 



CARD ESSAYS. 



countered much opposition. Several petitions against 
the tax were presented to Parhament, by card-makers 
and importers of paper, which are sufficiently inter- 
esting to be quoted at some length : — 

Considerations in Kelation to THE IMPOSITIOIS" 
CARDS, Humbly submitted to the Honorable 
House of Commons : — 

Nine parts in ten of the cards now inade are sold 
from 6s. to 24s. per gross, and even these six shilhngs 
in cards by this Duty are subjected to pay £3 12s. tax. 

Tills with humble submission will destroy jSTine 
Parts in Ten of this manufacture for those Cards 
which are now bought for 3d., can't then be afforded 
under lOd. or a shilling, for every hand through which 
they pass will add again in consideration of the Tax 
imposed and therefore the generahty of the people will 
buy none at all. 

*'If any of your Honors hope by this Tax to sup- 
press expensive Card-playing, It is answered, That 
the Common sort who play for innocent diversion will 
by this tax be only hinder'd ; for those sharp game- 
stei^ who play for money but do not use the Twentieth 
part of the Cards sold, will not by this Tax be dis- 
couraged ; for those who play for many Pounds at a 
game will not be hindered by paying 12 /. per pack : 
And the destruction of this manufacture will be at- 
tended with these ill consequences 

First, Nothing (in comparison) wiJl be (clear of 
all charges) raised by this duty imposed. 

Secondh/. All that depend upon this manufacture 
will be rendered incapable to maintain their numerous 
families or pay their debts. 

Thirdly. The English paper manufacture (which 



CARD ESSAYS. 



87 



is the middle of the Cards) will be extremely preju- 
diced. 

^'Fourthly. The importation of the G-enoa White 
Paper (with which the Cards are covered) will be 
very iiiuch diminished ; and in the consequence 
thereof, 

"'Fifthly and lastly. Her Majesty will lose as much 
Paper duty as the clear Duty on the Cards to be sold 
will amount unto. 

' ' And if it be intended to charge the Stock in hand, 
then the present Possessors will be thereby obliged to 
pay a Duty for Ten times more Cards than ever they 
will sell. 

" Wiitvefore it is humbly hoped, That your Honors 
will not lay a Duty which it's humbly conceived will 
bring no profit to the Queex, but inevitably ruin many 
hundreds of her subjects.'' 

The merchants importing Genoa paper and others 
followed suit in a similar strain : — 

The case of the Merchants Importing Genoa paper, 
the Stationers, Haberdashers of small ware, the 
English Paper-makers, and Card-makers. 

In relation to the Intended Duty on Cards, humbly 
submitted to the Honorable House of Commons,'' 

The preamble with slight alterations proceeds as in 
the previous petition down to the end of the first **ill 
consequence," and then the petition continues as fol- 
lows : — 

Secondly. The EngUsh Paper-Manufacture ex- 
tremely prejudiced, because by a modest computation 
there are 150 Paper Mills in England and each of 
these one with another Annually make 400 Rheams j 
one-Fourth of which is now used in the ordinary 



88 



CARD ESSAYS. 



cards, and none of these will (when this great Duty is 
imposed) be ever made. 

Thirdly, Her Majesty's Customs arising from the 
Importation of Grenoa Paper will be extremely les- 
sen'd : for it is reasonably supposed that there are 
40,000 Rheams of Grenoa paper annually used in this 
manufacture, which already pays Custom l^d. per 
Rheam, amounting to £1,666 135., which by this in- 
tended duty will be quite lost, the said Genoa paper 
being of little use but in Card-making. 

Fourtlily. Three parts in four of the Card-makers, 
and the many families which dejoend upon them, will 
by this intended Ta.x be inevitably ruin'd, for those 
Card-makers depend upon their credit and work 8 
months in 12 for the Y/inter-Season, and during those 
8 months scarce receive enough to find their famihes 
with Bread, and therefore can never pay this great 
Duty, and consequently not follow their trade. 

Seeing by this intended Duty her Majesty's loss in 
her Customs, the loss of the merchants importing 
paper, of the Stationers who credit the Card-makers, 
of the Wholesale Haberdashers who sell the Cards, 
and of the Card-makers, will amount to five times 
more than this designed imposition can clear of all 
charges be suppos'd to raise \ and five parts in six of 
the Card-makers and their numerous Dependents in- 
evitably ruined. 

''It is therefore humbly hop' d ^Ti^^^ Honorable Hotise 
will give relief in the Premisses." 

The poor Card-makers and the Company of Card- 
makers itlso presented petitions against the tax, in 
language almost identical. The following is the peti- 
tion known as that of the '* poor " card-makei*s : — 



CARD ESSAYS. 



81) 



Reasons Humbly offer'd by the Card-makers 
against the Tax upon Playing-Cards 

The Card-makers in and about the City of London 
are about One Hundred Master Workmen. ±'or some- 
time past (Paper having been double the Price as for- 
merly) the trade is much decayed. 

The most they sell their Cards for to the Retailei-s 
(one sort with another) is Three Half-pence the Pack, 
and their Profit not above one Half-penny. So that 
the Tax intended Avill be double the value of the Cards 
and six times their gain. 

The generality of these Card-makers are Poor men 
and out of the Small Grains above can hardly main- 
tain their famihes : And therefore to impose a Tax to 
be immediately paid upon making by the Card- 
makers (whose Stocks and Abihties are so very mean 
that they now make hard shift to forbear the Retailers 
the ordinary time of Credit) will be a direct way to 
Ruine these Poor Men. 

Besides there is at present a Stock of Cards in the 
retailers' hands sufficient for the consumption of Four 
or Five years ; and they will assuredly sell all the old 
stock off before they take any at the New advanced 
rate : The consequence whereof will be : — 

''First, That the Card-makei*s till that stock be 
sold off can make no new ones. 

''Secondly. That during that time their Families 
must needs starve. 

' ' Lastly. That until the card-makers can make new 
ones no money can arise by such Tax.'" 

Her Majesty's " occasions," however, v/ere such that 
opposition was fruitless, and the Act became law. 
The duty was imposed on all cards " made fit for sale 



90 



CARD ESSAYS. 



during a certain term. In the follo^ving year it Tvas 
found expedient, for the better securing the duties on 
playing-cards, and to prevent defrauding of the rev- 
enue, to amend this, and to enact that all stocks of 
cards which were fit for sale before the operation of 
the former act commenced, and which remained un- 
sold in the hands of any person tradhig in cards, 
should be brought to the Stamp-office to be marked. 
On the traders ma^king oath that the stocks so brought 
were actually made and finished before the 12th of 
June, 1711, they were entitled on payment of one half- 
penny per pack to have them sealed or stamped ac- 
cordingly. All cards not brought to the Office before 
the 1st of August, 1712, were to be deemed to be made 
fit for sale after June, 1711, and to be charged with 
the full dut}'. And after July, 1712, no X3laying-ca.rds 
were to be exposed for sale or used in play in any 
public gaming-house tmless marked in conformity 
with the provisions of the act, both on the tapper 
and on the si^otted or painted side (now called the 
fore-side), of one of the cards of each jDack. 

By the same Act the regulations permitting the 
search entry of revenue officers to the houses of 
card-makers were extended to public gaming-houses ; 
and the notices required to be given by card-makers, 
and the clauses relating to the removal of unstamped 
cards, were amended and made more stringent. 

Offenders against these provisions were rendered 
liable to a penalty of £5 for every pack of unstamped 
cards found in their possession. It was also madt' 
felony, punishable with death, to counterfeit or forge 
the seals, stamps or marks which denoted the pay- 
ment of the duties. About ninety* five years ago the 



CARD ESSAYS. 



91 



punishment of death was actually inflicted on an un- 
fortunate engraver named Harding, who engraved a 
duty ace of spades to the order of a card-maker. The 
card-maker escaped from the country, or he would, 
in all probablity, have shared the engraver's fate. 

Desiiite the precautions and penalties enumerated, 
frauds on the revenue continued. Indeed, every 
enactment relating to playing-cards is accompanied 
by some reference to fraudulent practices with regard 
to the duties under the former Act. It was now 
discovered that persons were in the habit, after cards 
had been used, of cutting out and tearing off the 
marks placed on the fore-side of playing cards, for the 
purpose of affixing the same marks to fresh packs, 
and so of making one stamp serve over and over 
again. There was also a method contrived to render 
available for further use the seal and stamp upon the 
outside papers or wrappers. In order to check these 
proceedings a clause was introduced into an Act 
passed in 6 Geo. I. (1719) for preventing frauds and 
abuses in the public revenues." A penalty of £10 
was imposed on any person convicted of working up 
old stamps ; and, when it was suspected that cards 
were being made up for sale in any private place 
(that is in any place of which the Commissioners of 
Stamps had not the usual written notice), power was 
given to the revenue officers, on a warrant being 
granted, to break open the doors of the suspected 
places, and to enter, and seize all cards, dice, tools, 
and materials with which they are made.'* 

Further, the term of thirty-two years over which 
the duty upon playing-cards was to remain in force 
was extended indefinitely. 



93 



CARD ESSAYS. 



Matters remained in the state described until 29 
Geo. II. (1756), when an additional tax of sixpence 
a pack was imposed on playing-cards. As usual, the 
opportunity was taken to frame measures in expecta- 
tion of preventing the fraudulent evasions of the duty 
which still obtained. It transpired that great frauds 
were committed under pretence that cards were 
manufactured for exxDortation, such cards being 
exempt from duty. It was therefore enacted that 
all playing-cards intended for exportation should be 
distinguished by a particular wrapper, and that one 
card in each export pack should be marked with a 
special stamp. Cards wapped and stamped as for 
exportation were not to be used in Grreat Britain, 
under a penalty of £20. A £20 x^enalty was also 
attached to the selling and buying of any covers 
or labels that had been already used. 

It appeared also that the trick of selHng slightly 
soiled playing-cards as waste " was largely practised, 
to the detriment of the revenue. The soiled cards 
consisted of those so damaged in making as to be 
rejected by the manufacturers. They were purchased 
for a few pence per pound, chiefly by Jew speculators, 
who sorted them and disposed of them at a cheap 
rate. In order to put a stop to this system, all 
persons disposing of cards ^' commonly called waste 
cards" were required before sale to ^* mark the back 
or plain side of every painted or picture card in such 
manner as to render the same unfit to be used in 
play." 

In the reign of Gfeorge III. no less than seven 
Acts of Parliament were passed relating to cards and 
dice. All this legislation tended to two ends, — to 



CARD ESSAYS. 



98 



impose additional duties, and to circumvent the 
evaders of the tax. It was more than suspected that 
the Inland Revenue officers were tampered with. A 
new plan was therefore resolved on. Hitherto the 
stamp had been impressed on the card made by the 
manufacturers, the card selected being generally, if 
not always, the ace of spades. But from and after the 
5th July, 1765, makers of playing-cards were required 
to send to the Stamp Office the paper on which the 
ace of spades was to be impressed. The Commis- 
sioners of Stamps were to print the duty aces of 
spades themselves, and had a plate prepared for the 
purpose, with a device somewhat similar to that in use 
up to 1863, only less elaborate. The Commissioners 
had the power of altering the device at pleasure, in 
order to throw difficulties in the way of counterfeiting 
it. The card-makers were further required to send to 
the office the wi-appers wliich they proposed to use 
for enclosing the cards. The wrappers were to have 
the maker's name printed on them, and were to be 
stamped with a sixpenny stamp. The stamp was 
not an additional duty. The duty still remained at 
one shilling : but the mode of imposition was varied, 
so that one half of the duty fell on the ace of spades, 
and the other half on the wrapper. At the same 
time, the penalty for refusing to allow inspection of 
premises where card-making was carried on, was 
raised from £20 to £50. 

Eleven years later an additional duty of sixpence a 
pack was levied, making the total duty one shilling 
and sixpence. 

In the mean time the ingenious enemies of the 
revenue had not been idle. The occupation of selhng 



94 



CARD ESSAYS. 



loaste cards was gone ; but there was no prohibition 
against selling second-hand cards. Accordingly, the 
card-maker's waste was still sorted into packs, which 
were disposed of as second-hand cards, ' ' to the great 
injury of the revenue." A penalty of £5 a pack was 
therefore imi30sed on any person selling second-hand 
cards, unless the backs of the picture cards were so 
marked as to render them unfit to be used in play. 

In 1789, and again in 1801, the duty was further 
increased by sixpenny steps, till it reached the sum of 
half- a- crown a pack. The traffic in cards not duly 
stamped was powerfully stimulated by the high duty. 
Various evasive devices were invented, and more than 
one speculator amassed a large fortune by selling, 
under various pretences, cards on which no duty had 
been paid. Under the then arrangements, waste aces 
of spades could not be procured to any great extent, 
for the damaged aces were returned to the Stamp 
Office, and allowed for in the card-maker's accounts. 
Packs, therefore, were made up for sale with a blank 
card in place of the ace of spades. Cut-corner cards, 
as they were called, i. e., packs of cards of which one 
corner was cut off, and minus the ace of spades, were 
sold in immense quantities. Cards with a corner cut 
off, half an inch in depth, were considered by Parlia- 
ment sufficiently mutilated to render them unfit to be 
used in play. The public, however, put up with the 
inconvenience of using cut-corner cards rather than 
pay the high tax. In fact, the law was found power- 
less to prevent evasions ; every fresh enactment 
produced some fresh dodge for driving through it. 
It was therefore decided to diminish the duty, and to 
legalize, under certain restrictions, the sale of second- 



CARD ESSAYS. 



95 



hand cards. In the year 1828, the half-a-crown duty 
was reduced to one shilling. The shilling duty was 
to be denoted on the ace of spades. This was the 
''duty one shilling" ace, called "Old Frizzle," on 
account of the elaborate flourishes which adorned it, 
with which all card-players, prior to 1864, were 
familiar. The aces were supplied on credit to the 
card-makers, the duty being exacted from time to 
time on their making up their packs for sale, when an 
officer had to attend to put on the wrappers, and to 
take an account of the numbers. Second-hand cards 
were permitted to be sold, except by licensed card- 
makers, provided the words second-hand cards" 
were legibly printed or written on the wrapper. 

Under the protection of this permission the sale of 
so-called second-hand cards flourished more vigor- 
ously than ever. The less scrupulous manufacturers 
used to make ''works " of waste by the ton, for the 
purpose of sale under the name of second-hand cards. 
Indeed the clandestine manufacture of cards sold as 
second-hand was so extensive, that one person alone 
" owned to the sale of more unstamped packs in one 
year than the whole number which, according to the 
revenue returns, had been charged with duty in the 
same period, that is to say, upwards of 260,000 packs." 
Consequently, by 25 Vict. (June, 1862) the duty 
was fixed at three-pence per pack, the alteration 
to commence on 1st September, 1862. The flnancia! 
year ends 31st March, therefore in 1862, half the year 
the duty was one shilling, the other half three-pence. 
In the seventh Report of the Commissioners of Her 
Majesty's Inland Revenue, 1863, it is stated that the 
alteration from one shilling to three-pence was made 



96 



CARD ESSAYS. 



** in the hope of suppressing the enormous evasion of 
the duty which notoriously prevailed." At the same 
time that the, amount was reduced, the form in which 
the duty was levied v>^as altered. Several other 
reasons for the alteration are given in the Report. 
The Commissioners remark that ''there were many 
disadvantages connected with these arrangements,'' 
with the arrangements which prevailed prior to 
1863.] The jjrincipal disadvantages were the expense 
Incurred in printing the aces, and the difficulty of ad- 
justing the card-makers' accounts. The card-makers 
were always in arrear ; they always had more aces 
supplied than were accounted for in the packs made 
up for sale ; and though the department had the 
power of taking an account of the stock not made up 
for sale, and held by the card-makers, and of charging 
for aces not accounted for, the power was but oc- 
casionally exercised, on account of the practical 
difficulty of taking exact stock without serious incon- 
venience to the makers. Moreover, when stock was 
taken, a deficiency of aces always appeared, even 
with the most respectable makers, who were above 
the suspicion of intentionally defrauding the revenue. 
This deficiency was, in many instances, allowed to 
stand over, so that in practice the amount thus owing 
was as good as remitted. 

According to the statement of the Commissioners, 
it appeared that, " from the mode in which the ace 
of spades was necessarily prepared at the office, that 
important card was always different fromx the rest of 
the pack, and that this difference, though slight, was 
to those who were aware of it, readily perceptible by 
the touch," so that, in fact, the duty, "which was 



CARD ESSAYS. 



97 



meant to be pro tanto a discouragement to gambling, 
was abetting the designs of the card sharper." 

The difference here alluded to is as to the size of 
the card ; this might hare been the case with small 
makers using imperfect machinery ; but manufac- 
turers of repute, who could properly manipulate the 
cards, were able to turn out the ace of spades precisely 
like the other cards as to size, thickness, and feel. 

The idea that the duty was meant to discourage 
gambling is purely imaginary. It was meant simply 
to increase the revenue in aid of Her Majesty's oc- 
casions ; " and as was well pointed out in the petition 
presented to Parhament in the reign of Queen Anne, 
a tax only hinders the common sort who play for 
innocent diversion, and not sharp gamesters who play 
for many pounds a game. 

Under the present system the ace of spades is free 
from duty, and is printed by the manufacturers in the 
same way as the other cards. The duty is now levied 
on the seal or wrapper in which each pack must be 
enclosed before it is sold ; and the duty applies to all 
full-sized playing-cards, whether new or second-hand. 
The wrappers are supplied from Somerset House as 
the card-makers require them, and have the name of 
the manufacturer printed on them. 

Thus ; suppose a new pack is opened and, as is the 
case at most clubs, is used only once. Under the old 
law the soiled pack was exempt from further duty if 
the words " second-hand cards " were legible written 
or printed on the wrapper. Now, however, second- 
hand cards before being resold must be enclosed in 
a fresh ^\Tapper and pay a second duty. 

In 1801 the amount of dutv received at one shilling 
7 



98 



CARD ESSAYS. 



a pack was £14,533, 290,660 packs being sealed. In 
1862 — mostly at one shilling, but a small part at three- 
pence — the duty produced £13,637, notwithstanding 
that about 160,000 more packs Avere sealed than before. 
When the new regime came into full operation in 
1863,732,960 packs were sealed, a very large increase 
when compared with the number stamped under the 
old rigime. Nevertheless, the receipts, owing to the 
reduction, amounted only to £9,162, entailing a loss 
of about £4,450. After 1867, however, the number 
of packs sealed steadily increased, to 737,120, 813,920, 
968,800, and so on ; and in 1873 the number stamped 
was over a million. In 1877-78 the duty rose to £14, 
139, so that at the present time the smaller duty pro- 
duces as much as the larger one did within a few 
pounds. And what is highly satisfactory is that there 
is no reason for supposing that there is now any 
evasion of the duty. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



90 



MOLIERE ON PIQUET. 



" Come, you sliall sit down to piquet.** 

^School for Scandal f Act i., sc. 2. 



MoLiKRE, like OTir Shakespeare, seems to have had 
a universal knowledge. Whatever he wrote about 
he probed, as it were, to the bottom. Among other 
things he must have had a profound knowledge of 
Piquet, or must have obtained his information from 
players of a very superior class, as the following ex- 
ample will demonstrate. 

In the year 1G61 appeared the comedy of Les 
Facheux." This play contains a somewhat remark- 
able Piquet hand, which is interesting as showing 
that Piquet was at that time a popular game in 
France, and also as illustrating the mode in which 
the game was then played, and, further, as affording 
room for instructive comment. The following is a 
free translation of the passage relating to Piquet : — 

Console me, Marquis, for the extraordinary partie 
at Piquet I lost yesterday against St. Bouvain, a man 
to whom I could deal and give fifteen points. It is 
a maddening coup which crushes me, and which 
makes me wish all players at the devil ; — a coup 



100 



CARD ESSAYS. 



enough to make a man go and hang himself. I oniy 
wanted two points ; he required a pique. I dealt ; 
he proposed a fresh deal. I, having pretty good cards 
in all suits, refused. He takes six cards. ISTow ob- 
serve my bad luck : I carry ace of clubs ; ace, king, 
knave, ten, eight of hearts ; and throw out (as I 
considered it best to keep my point) , king, queen of 
diamonds, and queen, ten of spades. I took in the 
queen to my point, which made me a quint major. 
To my amazement, my adversary showed the ace and 
a sixieme minor in diamonds, the suit of which I had 
discarded king and queen. But, as he required a 
pique, I was not alarmed, expecting to make at 
least two points in play. In addition to his seven 
diamonds he had four spades, and, playing them, he 
put me to a card, for I did not know wdiich of my 
aces to keep. I thought it best to throw the ace of 
hearts, but he had discarded all his four clubs, and 
capoted me with the six of hearts ! I was so vexed 
I could not say a word. Confound it ! why do I have 
such frightful luck ? " 

In order to render the hand intelligible, it is 
necessary to bear in mind that at the time Les 
Facheux " was written Piquet was played with thirty- 
six cards, the sixes being included in the pack. There 
were twelve cards in the stock, instead of eight as 
now, of which the elder hand might take eight, the 
younger four. The cards below a ten did not count 
in play ; or rather, according to the Academy of 
Play," they sometimes tell one for every card they 
lead or win, whether a tenth card or not, so that 
when two players sit down, who are not acquainted 
with each other's play, it is customary to ask. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



101 



Whether you count all the cards or not? " In the 
hand given the nines, eights, sevens, and sixes do not 
count in play. 

Moliere has skilfully heaped up the various small 
worries that may annoy an irritable player during a 
hand. The score is one source of annoyance : St. 
Bouvain wants a pique, Alcippe (his adversary) only 
wants two, and has such cards that, though a pique 
is not impossible it is in the highest degree improbable. 
As Fielding ('*Tom Jones") truly remarks, *^The 
gamester who loses a party at Piquet by a single 
point, laments his bad luck ten times -as much as he 
who never came within a prospect of the game." 
Again, x\lcippe has the chance offered him of a fresh 
deal, which imi^lies that his adversary has very bad 
cards — so bad, that he deems losing next door to 
certain. The fresh deal is refused, and, notwith- 
standing, St. Bouvain wins. Then the elder hand, 
having the right to take eight cards, only takes six, 
Avhich is a disagreeable surprise after proposing a 
fresh deal, as Alcippe would naturally wonder how it 
could be that, notwithstanding the bad hand, St. 
Bouvain can afford to leave two cards ; and, lastly, 
Alcippe is put to a card, which is by no means 
pleasant at any time, but is most unpleasant of all 
when you have two aces and require one trick only to 
win, and must lose if you keep the wrong one. An 
imaginative reader, too, might discover another 
aggravation. Alcippe, though he declares he lost by 
bad luck, really loses by bad play (as will be 
presently shown), and he expresses his intention, 
in a passage not translated, of going about showing 
the hand to everybody. It will certainly happen that 



102 



CARD ESSAYS. 



some * 'good-natured friend " will point out to him in 
a day or two how he might have won. 

Let us point the moral of the hand by taking the 
office of that friend. In order to do so, it will 
be advisable to follow the plan adopted by Dr. Pole 
in the case of Belinda's celebrated hand at Ombre, 
viz., to set out all the cards, supplying those not 
named by Moliere, in the most probable combinations 
suitable to the hand. 

St. Bouvain's hand, then, would be sixieme minor 
in diamonds (^. e., knave, ten, nine, eight, seven, six); 
four clubs, say king, queen, nine, seven ; and nine, 
seven of hearts. He discards the four clubs and the 
two hearts, keeping his sixieme, and takes in the ace 
of diamonds, the six of hearts, and four of spades, say 
the ace, king, knave, and eight. 

Alcippe deals himself king, queen of diamonds ; 
queen, ten of spades ; ace, king, knave, ten, eight of 
hearts ; and three clubs, say ace, knave, eight. The 
knave and eight are given that there may be no tierce 
against him in this suit ; this seems to be intended, as 
the Author, with probably the same object, gives him 
the eight of hearts. Also Alcippe must not hold a 
trio of kings, queens or tens, or he wins, as any trio is 
good; consequently his clubs must be knavo and 
eight. In addition, the knave of clubs in his hand 
prevents his adversary from holding a trio. He 
discards the diamonds, spades, and knave, eight of 
clubs, and takes in nine, seven, six of spades, queen 
of hearts, and ten, six of clubs. 

The hand is then played, with the following result : 
St. Bouvain's point and sixieme are good for twenty- 
three ; three counting diamonds played make twenty- 



CARD ESSAYS. 



103 



six, and three counting spades, twenty-nine. St. 
Bouvain has now played seven diamonds and four 
spades, eleven cards, and remains with one card, the 
six of hearts ; Alcippe remains with ace of hearts and 
ace»of clubs, and he has to play one of these to the 
last spade led by St. Bouvain. Alcippe plays the 
heart, and St. Bouvain, winning the trick with his 
last card, six of hearts, counts one for the last trick, 
which he would not have counted had he lost the 
ti'ick ; and he piques and capots his opponent. The 
capot which wins the game would suffice without the 
pique, supposing St. Bouvain to have taken in only 
two counting spades ; and, indeed this is the expla- 
nation of the hand given by the French commentators. 
But it appears more probable that this is not the 
result intended by Moliere. He carefully states that 
the queen, ten of spades were discarded by Alcij^pe, 
leaving us to infer that St. Bouvain may hold three 
counting spades. Moliere makes Alcippe re^Dcat that 
there is no pique against him, and yet he is piqued 
after all — an additional grievance, although it does 
not affect the result. 

It is obvious that St. Bouvain plays the hand fault- 
lessly, and it is equally clear that Alcippe (notwith- 
standing his boast of superior play), loses the game 
by not discarding to the score, as no doubt the good- 
natured friend already alluded to sooner or later 
points out to him. If he discards properly he must 
make two points, unless his adversary carries all the 
diamonds, and either the quart-minor in spades v/ith 
the ace, or a tierce in spades with ace, king ; and 
even then Alcippe may win with a trio of kings or 
gtueens. The chance that Alcippe wiU take in any of 



104 



CARD ESSAYS. 



the diamonds, or any one of the spades, or the king 
of clubs, or the queen of hearts, in six cards {i. e. one 
of sixteen named cards out of twenty -four), is so 
enormously in his favor, that he would be justified 
in considering there is no pique against him. His 
game then, playing for two points, is simply to protect 
himself from a capot by keeping guards to his weak 
suits, and throwing out his point, which at this score 
is useless to him. If he discards ace, knave, ten, eight 
of hearts, and knave, eight of clubs, he is morally 
certain to win. This is a good illustration of discard- 
ing to the score, and affords a lesson to beginners at 
Piquet. It will be observed that the ace of hearts is 
discarded instead of the king, for this reason. Any 
ace taken in wins the game, whether the trio of aces 
is kept or not ; but the king of clubs, or king of 
spades taken in does not win against a seven- card 
suit in diamonds, and ace with quart-minor in spades, 
or ace, king, accompanied by a tferce in spades, unless 
the kings are kept. 

Alcippe again plays badly in throwing the ace of 
hearts to the last spade. Had he gone on the chances, 
he would have won. It is evident that, in order to 
save the game, St. Bouvain's last card must be anon- 
counting card ; for St. Bouvain, having twenty-nine 
and the lead, gains a pique if his remaining card is a 
countijig card, because the point made in play by the 
leader counts before the point made in play by the 
winner of the trick. jN'ow St. Bouvain may hold one 
or three non-counting hearts, viz., the nine, theseve^ 
or the six ; but he can only hold one of two non- 
counting clubs, viz., the nine or the seven. This being 
so, there are three chances to two in favor of his last 



CARD ESSAYS. 



105 



card being a non-counting heart as against a non- 
counting club ; and, therefore, Alcippe should keep 
the heart in preference to the club. This is a point 
in the game well worthy of attention, as if it were not 
essential for St. Bouvain's last card to be a non- 
counting card, the club would be the suit to keep, 
there being four clubs out and only three hearts. 



106 



CARD ESSAYS. 



THE DUFFER'S WHIST MAXIMS. 



"* Printed for the benefit of families, and to prevent scolding." 

— Bob Short 



1. Do not confuse your mind by reading a parcel 
of "books. Surely you've a right to play your own 
game, if you like. Who are the people that wrote 
these books ? What business have they to set up 
their views as superior to yours ? Many of these 
writers lay down this rule : Lead originally from 
your strongest suit ; " don't you do it unless it suits 
your hand. It may be good in some hands, but it 
doesn't follow that it should be in all. Lead a single 
card sometimes, or at any rate, from your weakest 
suit, so as to make your little trumjps when the suit is 
'returned. By following this course in leads, 3v^ou will 
nine times out of ten ruin both your own and your 
partner's hands ; but the tenth time you will perhaps 
make several little trumps, which Vv^ould have been 
useless otherwise. In addition to this, if sometimes 
you lead from your strongest suit, and sometimes 
from your weakest, it puzzles the adversaries, and 
they never can tell what you have led from. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



107 



2. Seldom return your partner's lead ; you have 
as many cards in your hand as he has, it is a free 
country, and why should you submit to his dictation? 
Play the suit you deem best, without regard to any 
preconceived theories. It is an excellent plan to lead 
out first one suit and then another. This mode of 
play is extremely perplexing to the whole table. If 
you have a fancy for books you will find tliis system 
approved by J. C." He says, You mystify alike 
your adversaries and your partner. You turn the 
game upside down, reduce it to one of chance, and, 
in the scramble, may have as good a chance as your 
neighbors." 

8. Esrpecially do not return your partner's lead in 
trumps, for not doing so, now and then turns out to 
be advantageous. Who knows but you may make a 
trump by holding up, which you certainly cannot do 
if your trumps are all out ? Never mind the fact that 
you will generally lose tricks by refusing to play 
your partner's game. Whenever you succeed in 
making a trump by your refusal, be sure to point out 
to your partner how fortunate it was that you played 
as you did. Perhaps your partner is a much better 
player than you, and he may on some former occasion, 
with an exceptional hand, have decHned to return 
your lead of trumps. Make a note of this. Remind 
him of it if he complains of your neglecting to return 
his lead. It is an unanswerable argument. 

4. There are a lot of rules, to which, however, you 
need pay no attention, about leading from sequences. 
What can it matter which card of a sequence you 
lead ? The sequence cards are all of the same v^alue, 
and one of them is as likely to win the trick as 



108 



CAR]!> ESSAYS. 



another. Besides, if you look at the books, you'll 
find the writers don't even know their own minds. 
They advise in some cases that you should lead the 
highest, in others the lowest of the sequence ; and in 
leading from ace, king, queen, they actually recom- 
mend you to begin with the middle card. Any 
person of common sense must infer from this that it 
don't matter which card of a sequence you lead. 

5 . There are also a number of rules about the play 
of the second, third, and fourth hands, but they are 
quite unworthy serious consideration. The excep- 
tions are almost as numerous as the rules, so if you 
play by no rule at all you are about as hkely to be 
right as wrong. 

6. Before leading trumps always first get rid of 
all the winning cards in your plain suit. You will 
not then be bothered with the lead after trumps are 
out, and you thus shift all the responsibility of mis- 
takes on to your partner. But, if your partner has 
led a suit, be careful when you lead trumps to keep 
in 3' our hand the best card of his lead. By this 
means, if he goes on with his suit, you are more 
likely to get the lead after trumps are out, which, the 
books say, is a gTeat advantage. 

7. Take every opportunity of playing false cards, 
both high and low. For by deceiving all around you 
will now and then win an extra trick. It is often 
said, Oh, but you deceive your partner." That is 
very true. But then, as you have two adversaries and 
only one partner, it is obvious that by running dark 
you play two to one in your own favor. Besides this, 
it is very gi-atifying, when your trick succeeds, to have 
taken in your opponents, and to have won the ap- 



CARD ESSAYS. 



109 



plause of an ignorant gallery. If you play in a 
common-place way, even your partner scarcely thanks 
you. Anybody could have done the same. 

8. Whatever you do, never attend to the score, and 
don't watch the fall of the cards. There is no earthly 
reason for doing either of these. As for the score, 
your object is to make as many as you can. The 
game is five, but, if you play to score six or seven, 
small blame to you. Never mind running the risk of 
not getting another chance of making even five. 
Keep as many pictures and winning cards as you 
can in your hand. They are pretty to look at, and if 
you remain with the best of each suit you effectually 
prevent the adversaries from bringing in a lot of 
small cards at the end of the hand. As to the fall 
of the cards, it is quite clear that it is of no use to 
watch them ; for, if everybody at the table is trying 
to deceive you, in accordance with Maxim 7, the less 
you notice the cards they play the less you will be 
taken in. 

9. Whenever you have ruined your hand and your 
partner's by playing in the way here recommended, 
you should always say that it made no difference." 
It sometimes^happens that it has made no difference, 
and then your excuse is clearly valid. And it will 
often happen that your partner does not care to argue 
the point with you, in which case your remark will 
make it clear to everybody that you have a profound 
insight into the game. If, however, your partner 
chooses to be disagreeable, and succeeds in proving 
you to be utterly ignorant of the first elements of 
Whist, stick to it that you played right, that good 
play will sometimes turn out unfortunately, and ac- 



110 



CARD ESSAYS. 



cuse your partner of judging by results. This will 
generally silence him. 

10. Invariably blow up your partner at the end of 
every hand. It is not only a most gentlemanlike 
employment of spare time, but it gains you the 
reputation of being a first-rate player. 



CARD ESSAYS. 



Ill 



DECISIONS 

OP 

THE LATE Me. CLAY. 



ON THE PRINCIPLES WHICH SHOULD 
GUIDE DECISIONS. 

Is that the law? 

Thyself shalt see the act ; 
For, as thou urgest justice, he assui*ed 
Thou shalt have justice." 

Merchant of Venice, Act IV., so. I. 



It would hardly be fair to the memory of Mr. 
Clay to print the following Decisions without some 
preliminary explanation of the general principles 
which should be present to the mind of everyone 
who is likely to read them. 

There is a popular belief that card-laws are in- 
tended to prevent cheating. This belief, however, 
is altogether erroneous. The penalty of cheating is 
exclusion from Society. Card-laws cannot touch 
cheating, nor punish it. The intention of card-laws 
is ; 1. To preserve the harmony and to determine the 
ordering of the card-table; and 2. To prevent any 
player from obtaining an unfair advantage. 



112 



CARD ESSAYS. 



By unfair" is not meant intentional unfairness. 
By accident or carelessness any player may gain an 
advantage to which he is not entitled. Here the law 
steps in, and seeks to prevent the gaining of such an 
advantage. And, be it observed, the law does not 
attempt to punish the accidental or careless offender, 
but only to obtain restitution. 

The above considerations lead at once to two 
fundamental principles on which card Decisions 
should be framed. 

1. As the offending player is credited with Ifona 
fldes, the intention of the player interested must not 
be taken into account. The case must be judged by 
the amount of injury which the irregularity may in- 
flict on the opponents ; and 3. The penalty must be 
proportioned as closely as possible to the amount of 
gain which may accrue to the offender. 

For example : The dealer, by his own fault, ex- 
poses a card in dealing. Possibly the dealer has seen 
it, and the adversaries have not. They have a right 
to see it ; and they then have the option of a fresh 
deal. If they choose not to have a fresh deal, it is to 
be presumed they consider that, on the whole, the 
dealer and his partner will gain no advantage, or 
may even be at a disadvantage, if the position of the 
card in question is known. 

If the law were that the dealer loses his deal on 
exposing a card, that would be a punishment, as he 
would have to forego the advantage of the deal. By 
giving the adversaries the option of a fresh deal, they 
are protected from injury, and the dealer is not 
punished. 

The laws of Whist only afford one example of 



CARD ESSAYS. 



113 



punishment, viz. : in the revoke penalty. The offence, 
however, is very gross, and "there are practical diffi- 
culties in the way of adjusting the penalty, with 
precision, to the gain which might ensue in conse- 
quence of the revoke. 

In a perfect code there should be a penalty for all 
errors or irregularities by which the offender or his 
partner might profit. And it follows that there should 
be no penalty for errors by which he who commits 
them cannot possiMy gain an advantage. But, as Mr. 
Clay says : — " However carefully laws may have been 
framed, cases will not unfrequently occur for w^hich 
it has been impossible to provide, and which should 
therefore be referred for decision to some player of 
recognized judgment, well acquainted with the laws 
of Whist. If he happens to be a good lawyer to boot, 
so much the better ; for I have known many questions 
at this game not unworthy of a lawyer's practised 
acuteness, and of the habit which his profession gives 
him of weighing right and wrong." 

Cii AIMING Honors. 

Law 6. — Honors, unless claimed before the trump 
card of the following deal is turned up, cannot be 
scored. 

Case — A B claim ^*the game," and score it. After 
the trump card of the following deal is turned up 
Y Z (their adversaries) object that A B have not 
claimed honors. 

Decision. — It is necessary, and has always been 
the law by traditioii; to make it obligatory to call 

8 



114 



CAKD ESSAYS. 



honors, as well as to score them, as points merely 
scored may easily escape notice. 

*^It never, however, can have been intended to 
stretch the rule to such a case as this, in which, by 
claiming 'the game,' attention is as strongly drawn 
to the claim of honors as it well can be. 

Such a claim can hardly have been made, except 
for the puriDOse of having the point decided, and, in 
spite of the strict letter of the law, I consider the 
claim bad. 

Other cases may be found where the rigid inter- 
pretation of a necessary law would inflict a wholly 
unnecessary wrong ; but I know no case in which 
such interpretation has been insisted on. 

If Y or Z had had any doubt about the honors, 
and if there had been no evidence beyond the asser- 
tion of his adversaries, the law would have protected 
him ; and he ought to require nothing more. 

*' If Y or Z tells me that he was in no way called 
upon to admit the honors, I can only answer that 
this is a case between him and his conscience. I 
think he did right in making the admission, and have 
little doubt but that he will do the same on any 
other occasion. 

" In giving this opinion, not without hesitation, I 
bear in mind the extreme general inconvenience of 
allowing any lax interpretation of a law.'' 

It should be stated, in order to explain the reason 
for the first and third paragraphs of the decision, 
that it was given very shortly after the adox)tion of 
the present code, and therefore before Law 6, as 
quoted above, was generally known. 



CliAY'S DECISIONS. 



115 



Misdirection by Adversaries. 

Cdse. — A, B, C are playing dummy, C having the 
dummy. 

It is dummy's deal. By mistake, C deals for him- 
self instead of for dummy, and turns up. Then 
seeing the trump card on the table, C says, Whose 
is this ? '' 

AB reply, Dummy's," imagining C had dealt 
for his dummy. 

C then sorted dummy's hand, and placed the turn- 
up card with it. 

It was then discovered that dummy had fourteen 
cards, and C twelve. 

C then says, Oh ! it is a misdeal." 

A B say, No ; the mistake is obvious. Just put 
the turn-up card to your hand, and all will be right." 

It was decided by a bystander to be a misdeal, 
which was unfortunate for AB, as they had game in 
their hands. 

Was it a misdeal ? 

Decision, — ** If it is allowed, or can be proved, 
that dummy's partner dealt, — whether in or out of 
his turn matters not, as the deal was completed with- 
out objection, — the deal is good. The trump card 
has been placed in one part of the table instead of 
another ; — mild tout. Everyone knows it, and it can 
be put in its right place, — before a card has been 
played. — without inconvenience. 

" This is all the more strong, in the present case, 
as the card was wi-ongly placed in consequence of the 
mistaken intimation of the adversary. 

Strictly, perhaps, the dealer ought not to have 



116 



CLAY'S DECISIOJJ^^S. 



asked his adversary to help him, but should have 
thought over the puzzle himself, which he would 
probably have found out [by counting his cards] 
This gives the adversaries a right not to answer, but 
does not excuse them for answering wrongly." 

Card Juiviphstg into Adversary's Haitd. 

Case, — A, in taking up his cards, the deal being 
completed, bends a card so that it jumps on Y's (the 
adversary's) packet. At that moment Y takes up his 
hand, and mixes the card with it, so that no one can 
tell which is the added card. 

What is to be done ? 

Decision. — ''This is one of those queer cases, — 
assisted by no analogy which occurs to me, — which 
can only be the subject of what I should call a fancy 
decision. 

'' I agree with you [the Author had already given 
liis opinion] that the dealer must not suffer by an 
irregularity which had its origin in an adversary. 
Nor can I acquit Y of some carelessness ; and I think 
that justice is satisfied by A's drawing a card at 
hazard from Y's hand. 

If A had been the dealer's partner, I should give 
the choice of a new deal to his adversaries. They 
electing to stand the deal, before seeing their cards, a 
card to be drawn at hazard. The cards seen, nothing 
remains, I think, but to draw one." 

It should be added, for the benefit of those not con- 
versant with the laws of Whist, that taking up the 
cards is always considered, ii? deciding cases, as equiv- 
alent to seeing them. 



CI/AY'S DECISIOJJ^S. 



117 



DECLARiisrG A Card, but Omitting to Plat it 

Law 69. — If any one omit playmg to a former 
trick, and such error be not discovered until he has 
played to the next, the adversaries may claim a new 
deal ; should they decide that the deal stands good, 
the surplus card at the end of the hand is considered 
to have been played to the imperfect trick, but does 
not constitute a revoke therein. 

Case. — A B versus Y Z. A leads a heart; Y plays 
knave; B calls out king," but does not play any 
card ; Z plays a small heart. 

B, takes up, turns and quits the trick, consisting of 
three cards, and leads another card. Two or three 
tricks are played, and then another heart is led, and 
B plays the king, when it is discovered that B., 
having declared the king, omitted to play it. 

What is the rule ? 

Decision. — The case was, in the first instance, sub- 
mitted to the Author, who decided as follows ; — 

On discovery of the error, B must add the king to 
the imperfect trick. The words*' at the end of the 
hand " in Law 69, do not signify that B must wait 
till the end of the hand before rectifying his error ; 
but amount merely to a direction what is to be done 
with the surplus card if the hand is played out before 
the error is discovered. Or, it may be, and generally 
would be, that the player omitting to play to a trick, 
does not declare a card ; in that case, the surplus 
card cannot be added till the end of the hand, because 
no one can say which of the offender's cards is to be 
subtracted from his hand. 



118 



clay's decisions. 



It might be argued that declaring a card is equiv- 
alent to playing it, and that, therefore, B has not 
omitted to play to a ti'ick. But, looking at the con- 
sequences that might ensue if players were allowed to 
declare their cards, instead of playing them, I tliink 
a person declaring a card and not playing it, does 
omit to play to a trick within the meaning of Law 69, 
and that the adversaries have the option of a fresh 
deal. 

The Author's decision was objected to by a player 
for whose opinion he entertained a high regard. 
Consequently, he submitted the case to Clay, who 
favored him with the decision below : — 

I quite agi-ee with your decision in this case, viz. : 
that Y Z have a right to elect whether the deal shall 
stand or not, and that, if they decide to go on, the 
king of hearts should be added to the imperfect trick. 

**It seems that this decision is challenged, and that 
the objection made to it is thus expressed : — ' Either 
B has omitted to play to the trick or he has not, and 
it ought to be in the option of the adversaries to de- 
cide this. If they decide that B has not omitted to 
play to the trick, the king of hearts is to be added to 
the trick to which it belongs, and no further penalty 
remains. On the other hand, if the adversaries decide 
that B has omitted to play to the trick, they can call 
a fresh deal. If they elect to stand the deal, then B 
must play out the hand with a surplus card, the 
card at the end belonging to the imperfect trick, as 
enacted in Law 69.' The objection is ingenious,' but 
fails to convince me. Law 69 contemplated that 
which would almost invariably be the case in such 
an error as this, namely, that it would not be found 



clay's DECISIOJirS. 



119 



out until the end of the hand. But as, in this 
instance, the error is early detected, and is of very 
easy remedy, it seems unnecessarily pedantic to 
abandon the remedy in deference to the letter of a 
law which could not contemplate this particular case. 

''Your critic proposes, to my mind, an insufficient 
punishment ; nor can Y Z, by their election, decide 
that there has been no omission. They cannot alter 
the fact, and it is beyond doubt that there has been 
omission. Availing themselves of the general prin- 
ciple, which allows considerable latitude in construing 
an act as against an offender, they decide that this 
imperfect act of playing shall be deemed a perfect 
act. But they do more ; — they have a common-sense 
right to do more ; — indeed, they are bound in com- 
mon-sense to do more ; they take care that the Imper- 
- feet act of playing is made perfect, and they place the 
king of hearts in the Trick to which it belonged from 
the moment of the declaration to play it. 

*' If this be not so, observe what may happen. To 
adopt the form of your critic, eitlier the trick with 
three cards in it is complete, or it is not. YZ, by con- 
tinuing the play of the hand, have decided that the 
trick is complete j therefore, the king of hearts has 
taken a trick ; the suit is played again, and the king 
of hearts takes a second trick. It seems to me im- 
possible that this can be permitted knowingly ] and 
if in your decision there be, — which I do not admit, — 
some difficulty or defective logic, as suggested by your 
critic, it would be, to my thinldng, quite worth while 
to ride over it, in order to. avoid the possible occur- 
rence of an absurdity so monstrous as that which I 
have described. Two tricks taken by one card ! A 



120 



CXAY'S DECISIONS. 



trick, notoriously imperfect, taken as perfect in one 
sense and imperfect in another ! The ownership of a 
trick to remain unnecessarily in abeyance until a sur- 
plus card, the existence of which everyone knoAvs, 
and could have prevented, is found at the end of the 
hand ! This surplus card possibly being an advan- 
tage to a wrong doer 1 All this cumbrous rubbish 
is cleared away by your very simple and sensible 
decision. 

I should have more to say. but that I foresee that 
it would raise a more important question, which I 
would rather not stir." 

What this more important question is can now 
never be known. Ko doubt Clay did not care to 
spend the requisite time over card decisions, as he 
was fully occupied and wrote under pressure. The 
original of this decision is written by an amanuensis, 
to whom, the Author believes. Clay dictated it while 
he was dressing, that being the only moment he could 
spare. 

The Author can hardly help feeling that the more 
important question was probably whether a surplus 
card added to an imperfect trick at the end of a hand 
can win the trick. In his decision Clay seems to as- 
sume that it can. It is a point of extreme difficulty ; 
on the whole, the Author is of opinion that it cannot 
(see The Field of February 27th, 1875), though at the 
time- the case of declaring a card but omitting to play 
it was submitted to him (December. 1866.) he thought 
it could. 

Clay's decision on the original case was much can- 
vassed at the time ; but finally it was generally al- 
lowed to be sound. 



clay's decisions. 



121 



Penalty for RENOUNCiNa in Error with 

MORE THAN ONE CARD. 

Law 76.— If a player discover bis mistake [of not 
following suit when able,] in time to save a revoke, 
the adversaries, whenever they think fit, may call the 
card thus played in error, or may require him to play 
his highest or lowest card to that trick in which he 
has renounced. 

Case. — In playing to a trick, A plays two cards 
together, neither being of the suit led. Before a re- 
voke is established A finds that he can follow suit. 
He is then required by his adversaries to play his 
highest card of the suit led. Can A then take up 
both the cards played in error ? 

It was argued that according to Law 76, A can only 
take up one card, and must leave the other to be 
called. If this contention holds, the question arises, 
Which of the two cards is A entitled to take up ? 

It is further pointed out, that if the word " card " 
in Law 76 is to be construed as ''card or cards," then 
A might play in a packet every card in his hand, not 
of the suit led, and on being required to play his 
highest or lowest of the suit led, might take up all 
the cards played in error, when the penalty would 
be insufficient. 

Decision. — I feel that Law 76 meets the case, 
Either the exposed cards can be called, or the highest 
or lowest of the suit led." 

This decision does not, in words, meet the objection 
that in the case of the playing of several cards 



122 



CI^AY'S DECISIONS. 



together, calling tlie highest or lowest of the suit led 
is an insufficient penalty. 

Probably Clay hardly thought it worth while to 
combat this objection. The reply is evident. The 
adversaries have the option of calling all the cards 
played together, or of calling the highest or lowest of 
the suit led. They will naturally elect the penalty 
which they deem the more severe. 

If it were to their advantage to call all the exj)osed 
cards, they then simply allow the offender to play 
whichever card he pleases to the current trick. 

Clay's decision was much canvassed at the time, 
and it was questioned whether he had the right to 
make a verbal alteration in Law 70, and to read the 
words 'Hlie card played in error," as '*the cards 
played in error." 

On caroiully considering this point, the Author is 
of opinion that Clay's decision is correct. It disposes 
of all difficulties (as, for example, of the question 
which of the cards is to be deemed played to the 
trick), and cuts the knot simply and effectually. 



Disputed Bet on the Odd Trick. 

Case, — A bets B that B will not get the odd trick. 
B is the dealer, and makes a misdeal. 

A claims the bet, on the ground that B did not get 
the odd trick. 

Decision, — Clay wrote, **I am of opinion that the 
bet is off." In tliis view he was supported by several 
members of the Whist Laws Committee of the Port- 
land Club of 1864. 



CliAT'S DECISION'S. 



123 



Another member of that Committee, Major Adams, 
wrote, My opinion is that A has no right to claim 
the bet. Considered on equitable gi-ounds, he would 
have the option of claiming the continuation of the 
bet, after B has forfeited his deal." 

Clay's opinion clearly assumes that the bet was 
made not on the next odd trick, but on the result of 
the deal in progress ; and, that deal having proved 
abortive, the bet is null and void. 

The referees were unanimous that A does not win : 
for the fact of B's making a misdeal does not lose 
him the odd trick. If it did, and B's adversaries 
were at four, B would lose the game, which is absurd, 
B cannot lose, nor can A win, until an odd trick has 
been played for. 

The question then resolves itself into this : — Is the 
bet off, or is it decided by the result of the next 
deal? 

In the Author's judgment, the case can only be 
decided on a report of the exact words made use of 
when the bet was proposed and accepted. Assum- 
ing, as the case is stated, that the exact words made 
use of are quoted, the Author would hold that the 
bet is on the next odd trick, in-espective of whose 
deal it is. B, when he has the deal, backs himself 
to win the odd trick. If he misdeals it is his fault, 
and the Author ca-nnot see that his misdealing ought 
to relieve him of the bet. If the terms of the bet had 
been I back the deal for the trick," and the dealer 
misdeals, the bet is off, as the deal on which the bet 
was made was never completed, and consequently 
the result of it can never be ascertained. 



124 



CliAY'S DECISIOISrS. 



Time for CoRRECTI:^-G^ a Renoujs'ce Error. 

Law 85. — Anyone during the play of a trick, or 
after the four cards are played, and before, but not 
after, they are touched for the purpose of gathering 
them together, may demand that the cards be placed 
before their respective players. 

Laws 73 AjN^d 76. — A revoke is established if the 
trick in which it occurs be turned and quitted. 

If a player discover his mistake in time to save a 
revoke, the adversaries may call the card played in 
error, or may require him to play [i. e., to follow suit 
with] his highest or lowest card. 

Case. — A B are partners against Y Z. Y leads, the 
others play, one or more of them not following suit. 
B wins the trick, and A gathers it ; but, before turn- 
ing it, feeling uncertain whether he has renounced or 
not, says, Partner, what was led ? " 

Y Z object that, under Law 85, A is too late, the 
trick being gathered, and consequently that the ques- 
tion must not be replied to. 

Decision. — On the case being referred to the Author, 
he decided that the question was put in an improper 
form. A has no right to ask what was led (i.e., what 
card was led), but, being in time to save a revoke, he 
is entitled to be informed what suit was led. If Y Z 
are &ona fide under the impression that A wishes a 
card to be placed, they may object that he is too late. 
But on A's explaining that he only desires to ascer- 
tain whether he has followed suit. Y Z are bound to 
permit A to be informed as to the suit led. 



CJDAY'S DECISIOifS. 



125 



To this it was objected that, the cards ph red being 
of different suits, A, by being informed what suit was 
led, and knowing who had won the trick, would (or 
might) hence obtain the same information as though 
the cards were placed. This is true ; but the Author 
maintained that it does not invahdate A's right to 
save a revoke, if in the course of obtaining informa- 
tion in order to avoid the revoke penalty he gains 
collateral information to which he is not directly 
entitled. 

The Author's correspondents not being satisfied, he 
had recourse to Clay, who wrote as follows : — 

have no doubt your decision is correct. The 
ground for my opinion is that the laws have always 
been very tender in respect of revokes, the mistake 
being of easy occurrence, and the penalty very severe. 
There is, no doubt, no law strictly applicable to this 
particular case ; nor can there be a special law for 
the many similar cases which may easily occur; but 
the case is clearly within the indulgence which the 
law extends to revokes." 



Disputed Misdeal. 

Law 44. — It is a misdeal [i.e., the dealer loses his 
deal] should the dealer deal two cards at once, or two 
cards to the same hand, and then deal a third. 

Law 37. — There must be a new deal [i.e., the same 
dealer deals again] if any card excepting the last be 
faced in the pack. 



126 



CLAY'S DECISIOIfS. 



Case> — The dealer deals, or is alleged to have dealt, 
two cards to one hand, and one to the next hand, 
and the adversaries claim a misdeal. The dealer 
denies having dealt two cards together, and, as no 
one is allowed to count the cards during a deal, he 
continues his deal. He then comes to a faced card, 
and claims a fresh deal. 

What is the law ? 

Decision. — The case was sent to the Author, who 
decided that the deal is only allowed to proceed in 
order to settle a question of fact, by seeing, at the end 
of the hand, whether the cards come right. The 
appearance of the faced card puts an end to the deal, 
and the adversaries are thus baulked of one mode of 
establishing the fact of a misdeal. But they cannot 
be thereby estopped from any other satisfactory mode 
of proof. They are at liberty, after the deal is put an 
end to by the apxDearance of the faced card, to count 
the hands, and if one hand has a card too many they 
prove the fact alleged, and establish a misdeal. 

This ruling was not approved of, as appears from 
the letter which follows : — 

Will you Idndly grant a rehearing of the case? 
I argue that, from there being a faced card in the 
pack, the deal is absolutely and db initio void, and 
not only voidable. It is void for all purposes, as 
well for establishing a misdeal as for making a valid 
deal, and was void at the moment the misdeal was 
made." 

On receiving this the Author, as he always did when 
in difficulties, resorted to Clay. Clay wrote : — 

The case of misdeal is curious, but I am not 
shaken in my opinion [by the letter forwarded]. The 



CLAY'S DECISIONS. 



127 



cards, to my thinking, must be taken to be in every 
respect right until proved to be wrong. The dealer 
forfeits the deal previous to any such proof, and, in a 
similar case, a player dishonestly inclined might face 
a card in the pack in order to avoid forfeiture which 
he knows himself to have incurred. 

Your answer is perfect and la^vyer-like." 



CONSUIiTATION BETWEEJ^ PARTjSISRS. 

Law 84. — Where a player and his partner have an 
option of exacting from t^eir adversaries one of two 
penalties, they should agree who is to make the elec- 
tion, but must not consult with one another which 
of the two penalties it is advisable to exact ; if they 
do so consult they lose their right [to demand any 
penalty]. 

Law G2. — If any player lead out of turn, his adver- 
saries may either call the card erroneously led, or 
may call a suit. 

Case, — A leads out of turn. Y (an adversary) says 
to his partner, Shal] we call a suit? " Y's partner 
makes no answer. A says **You have consulted.'* 
Y denies that it is a consultation, as his partner made 
no answer. 

Decision. — **Y has 'consulted' his partner. An 
answer is not necessary to make a consultation, but 
if it were, silence is an answer,. The knowledge that 
his partner is indifferent might have been of value to 
Y, and might have been precisely the kind of knowl- 
edge" that he had no right to extract " 



128 



clay's decisions. 



Rubber Paid for when Not Won. 

Case, — A B play against Y Z. A B win a single. 
Only one game is played. Y Z say, ''We lose four 
points." Four points are paid, and two of the players 
cut out. Presently it is discovered that Y Z have 
only lost one game. A B admit the fact, and offer 
to play out the rubber on the first convenient ox^por- 
tunity. 

The case happened in this way. A single was left 
up by mistake from the previous rubber. The first 
game of the following rubber was a very long one, 
and, at its conclusion, A B innocently received the 
points as though they had won the rubber. 

Ought A B's offer to reopen the rubber to be ac- 
cepted ? 

Decision. — The Author answered his correspondent 
to the following effect : — 

It is too late to reopen the rubber. Y Z could 
scarcely avail themselves of A B's offer without intro- 
ducing a give-and-take system, which is sure to end 
unsatisfactorily. However hard the case, play the 
strict game. Extreme inconvenience would result if 
the rule were that rubbers once conckided could be 
reopened. Fancy being reminded that the day beforcj 
yesterday you marked honors when not entitled, and 
that you won the rubber in consequence, and then 
being requested to sit down and play it out ! 

The above decision was by no means generally 
agreed to. Several players of repute thought that A 
B's offer ought to be accepted. 

Under these circumstances the Author sent the case 



CLAY S DECISIOjS^S. 



129 



to Clay, with the request, Will you be so good as to 
give your opinion whether Y Z should accept A B's 

offer or not ? " 

Clay wrote : — 

Y Z appear to make, — and can have, — no claim. 
The question put to me is one of morals, not of law. 

* ' It may be that my moral perceptions are less 
acute than my legislative instincts. At any rate, I 
shall not find fault with Y Z whether they accept or 
refuse the offer made to them. 

In my own case I did decHne with thanks the 
courteous proposal of A B, on the ground that the 
original mistake was mine, and that 1 was content to 
pay for it." 



Player called on Not to Win the Trick. 

Case. — A leads a small heart; Y plays a small 
one ; B plays the ten ; Z (fourth hand) says " Small 
one." 

A (suspecting that Z has made a mistake, and that 
he can win the ten), says, Don't win it." 
Is A entitled to this penalty ? 

Decision, — Of course Z would have done better to 
play his card in the usual way, and to say nothing 
about it. 

"Equally, of course, although the definition of a 
* small one ' is no where laid down, it must be taken 
in this case to mean a lower card than the ten. Still 
the term is so vague, and the observation so much in 

9 



130 



CLAY'S DECISIONS. 



accord with things constantly, if carelessly, said at 
whist, that, if cases like this are to be punished, the 
game would become a painful labor. 

The advantage to be gained by Z's partner is too 
small to call for severity, for if Z, after his observa- 
tion, should take the trick, he cannot be sure that Z 
had not mistaken the suit on the table when he made 
his observation, and this indeed would be the most 
likely explanation of it. 

Supposing this to have been so, and Z cannot 
help taking the trick, what is to be done then ? 

**Many other inconveniences are also possible from 
an imposition in this case. 

Take the following. A friend of mine, — a very 
charming player, but of a jocose disposition, — is con- 
stantly in the habit, when his adversary plays a king, 
of saying, before playing his own card, — 'I have a 
small one for that,' and thereupon produces the ace. 
Are you to pounce upon him, directly he has fired off 
his little joke, and say, * Don't take the trick ? ' * 

On the whole, therefore, I am of opinion, that A 
cannot claim his penalty ; though I am somewhat 
reluctant to give an opinion, which may appear to 
sanction some laxity." 

When Clay first sent the Author this decision, he 
was rash enough to dissent from it. Indeed, the case 
is admitted by Clay himself to be one of doubt, for he 
wrote elsewhere, ' ' I made up my mind the other way 
about this case yesterday, but on further thought 
have altered my opinion." 

More experience in deciding cases, has convinced 
the Author that Clay's decision, as printed above, is 
right. 



CLAY'S DECISIONS. 



131 



Disputed Revoke. 

Case, — A takes the twelfth trick by trumping, and 
claims game. The adversaries admit the claim and 
throw down their cards. A lowers his remaining 
card, but does not quit it. The adversaries then ob- 
serve that A could have followed suit to the previous 
trick, and claim a revoke. 

A pleads that as the trick is not turned and quitted, 
and as neither he nor his partner has played agaiuj 
he is in time to correct his error. 

Decision, — *'The revoke is not complete. It ot 
course makes no difference whether the mistake oc- 
curred in the last two cards or earlier in the hand. 

In this case the adversary found out the mistake 
by seeing the card left in the claimant's hand. But I 
don't see that this makes any difference. The adver- 
sary should have been sharp enough not to find out 
the mistake until the claimant had done some act, — 
which he would have done in a few seconds, — com- 
pleting the revoke. 

*^ If I was in time to find out my own error, and 
correct it, the adversary cannot limit this time by 
finding out my mistake for me. 

I attach no v^alue to the last card being so ex- 
posed that any one could see it. 

If the claimant had gone so far as to take down 
his score, and score up the game, I might consider 
the revoke complete. I don't feel sure." 



133 



CliAY'S DECISI019'S. 



PiiAYER Mixing a Trick with his Hand. 

Case. — A, having gathered a trick, instead of plac- 
ing it on the table before him, put it, in a fit of ab- 
sence, into his hand. 

What is the penalty ? 

Decision. — The decision in this case comes under 
the class of fancy decisions, to which you can hardly 
apply any known law, and as to which it is not 
necessary to be pedantically strict, seeing that no man 
can repeat his offence, even occasionally, without 
coming under social penalties, which laws, such as 
ours, cannot lay down, — still less enforce. 

*' I should, therefore, decide that, if the offender can 
establish by the assent of his adversaries, or by the 
evidence of bystanders, the four cards which he 
wongfully took in his hand, he may be permitted to 
do so without penalty, and, for this purpose, he may 
be allowed to show, or name the cards, although 
they may be four of eight cards turned and quitted. 

If, however, his adversaries deny his accuracy, 
and he has no evidence to prove it, he must submit 
to the loss of the game. I see no other sufficient pen- 
alty, and serve him right for making such a 

muddle." 



Re Leading and Dealing Out of Turn. 

When the present Laws of Whist were under dis- 
cussion, Clay wrote to the Author as follows about 
the laws of leading and deahng out of turn. The 



clay's decisions. 



133 



Author cannot call to mind precisely the original 
point, having unfortunately mislaid the letter : — 

August 9, 1863. 
** Dear Joxes, — I agree very nearly Avith all you 
say. Your principle that a man is bound to take 
reasonable care, — especially of his own property, — 
is in accordance with old and sound decisions. There 
are to my mind, however, a few exceptions, — where a 
trap may be so easily set that it requires unusual 
vigilance not to fall into it. 

On this ground it is that I have always decided, 
— mind, in these cases there is practically no penalty 
for setting the trap, — that if a man leads out of his 
turn, the cards of those who follow him are not liable 
to be called. I suppose the case of leading a cajd 
which may be called and no harm done. 

I think the dealing out of turn comes under this 
exception. If a man puts the cards in the Avrong 
place iz is 100 to 1 that he may deal out of his turn 
next time without being found out. 

' ' Yours very truly, 

" James CiiAT." 



Is A Lowered Hand Liable to be Called ? 

Law 56. — All exposed cards arehable to be called 
The following are exposed cards : — I. Two or more 
cards played at once. II. Any card dropped with 
its face upwards or in any way exposed on or above 
the table. 



134 



clay's DECISIOIJfS. 



Law 58. — If a player, under the impression that 
game is lost or won, throws his cards on the table 
face upwards, such cards are exposed, and liable to 
be called. 

Law 60. — A card detached from the rest of the 
hand so as to be named, is liable to be called. 

The Author was looking on at Whist at the Port- 
land when his father, thinking the game could not 
be saved, lowered his cards and was about to throw 
them down, but his partner checked him, beheving 
that the game might be saved, as in fact it might. It 
was admitted that everyone saw the lowered*cards, 
and the adversaries thereupon required them to be 
laid on the table to be called. They were laid on the 
table, and called, and the game was lost. 

After it was all over, the Author told his father 
that he need not have submitted to the call, as there 
is no penalty for lowering the hand. This remark 
being overheard, a lively discussion ensued, and, 
thinking the case of some importance, the Author 
published his opinion in The Field. 

Little did he dream of the hornet's nest he had 
brought about his ears. "Mogul," an excellent 
player and admirable judge of the laws, regarded 
his opinion as extraordinary." He thought that, if 
a man intending to let all the players see his cards, 
deUberately lowers them until clearly visible to all, 
they are exposed under the words of Law 56, par. II., 
*' or m any way exposes them," and that the fact of 
the cards being retained in his hand does not alter 
the fact that the cards are exposed above the table. 

Mogul " held, therefore, that lowered cards are 



CliAY'S DECISIONS. 



135 



liable to be called, unless some other law distinctly 
says that cards held in the hand, though exposed^ 
are not liable. 

"Mogul" also put these cases to demonstrate the 
absurdity of the Author's view ; — A player holding 
six cards separates five of them and lowers them. 
These are detached cards, and can be called if named. 
But if he commits a greater offence, and shows all 
six cards together, by lowering his hand, none of 
them can be called. If, in fact, he lowers them one 
by one they can be called ; but not if he lowers them 
all together. 

Again, if a player says or implies that he has a card 
in his hand, it is constructively exposed, and can be 
called ; but when he actually shows it with the rest 
of his hand it cannot be called. 

Lincoln's Inn," also an excellent judge of the 
game and of its laws, agreed with Mogul," and 
added that he considered lowered cards to be cards 
exposed "above" the table. Also, that the words 
"in anyway exposed" must have a meaning; and 
the meaning he contended for is that these words 
apply to cards which are exposed otherwise than as 
specifically stated in the other clauses relating to 
exposure. 

To these arguments the Author replied as fol- 
lows : — 

The words "in any way exposed" do not define 
exposure. They merely state, in a roundabout way, 
that exposure is exposure. Melted butter is butter in 
any way melted; an exposed ankle is an ankle in 
any way exposed ; and so exposed cards are cards in 
any way exposed. 



136 



CARD ESSAYS. 



The word above " is introduced to meet the case 
of a card which leaves the player's hand above the 
table, but is recovered by hhn before it touches the 
table, a case I have seen i*3re than once. It has 
never been on " the table, but has been, technically, 
exposed above it. 

The law having defined exposed cards as cards 
dropped face upwards on or above the table, says by 
implication that if cards are not dropped, but merely 
lowered without being abandoned, they are not tech- 
nically exposed ; and hence a lowered hand may be 
raised to its usual position without penalty. 

The reason the law does not seek to exact a penalty 
for lowering the hand is to my mind clear. To bring 
an offender within the pale of the law he must do 
some irregular act which can be clearly defined. For 
instance, he must drop a card, or detach a card. 
These are acts about which there can be no dispute 
as to the fact. But when it comes to be a question at 
what precise angle a man may or may not hold his 
cards (this question being involved in lowering the 
hand), the law, wisely as I think, determines not to 
interfere. Imagine the law to be that a player lower- 
ing his hand so that his partner can see it, is liable to 
have his cards called. Such a law would give rise to 
endless disputes as to whether the hand was so 
lowered that the partner could see the cards. 

The Author's opinion being much opposed, he 
sought, as usual, when criticised, to strengthen it by 
obtaining Clay's decision. Clay wrote as under : — 

You ask my opinion as to whether a player at 
Whist, holding his hand so low that it can be seen by 
the other players, is liable to have his cards called 



CARD ESSAYS. 



137 



under the laws, whether, directly or by imphcation, 
which affect exposed cards. 

Whether a hand so lowered as you describe should 
be liable to be called, is a question which 1 have 
always considered very debatable. I was, however, 
and am still of opinion that these cards should not be 
treated as exposed cards, for the following reason : — 

When the law inflicts any penalty for an offence 
at cards, it is desirable that the act to be punished 
should be clear and beyond doubt. Thus, for 
example, throwing down the cards on the table is an 
act as to which no disjDute of fact can arise. So also, 
in the case of a separated card, the fact of the separa- 
tion is required to be proved, and can be proved, by 
the naming of the card separated. In the case of a 
lowered hand, the question of degree is introduced, 
that is to say, how much or how little the hand has 
been lowered, and it is a question which it may be 
often very diflQcult to settle. Thus, a player may say 
to his opponent, ^ I shall call your cards, for every one 
can see your hand.' To which the reply may be, 
' My partner cannot. Why do you look over my 
hand?' Indeed, in the old days of duelling, I 
recollect a serious quarrel resulting from the above 
occurrence. 

I may be told then that, whenever it is of great 
importance to a player that his partner should know 
his cards, 'and of no great consequence that they 
should be seen by his adversaries, he may, by lower- 
ing his cards, give this information, and be subject to 
no penalty. But this is not so. There are many 
offences at cards, and those the most serious, against 
which no laws can be framed, because the offence is 



138 . 



CARD ESSAYS. 



very difficult of proof, and because, if proved, the 
only proper punishment would be expulsion from 
the society in which it was committed. 

A good instance of this class of offence is the case 
of a player who looks over his neighbor's hand. 
What offence can be graver ? Yet no penalty can be 
attached to it. By inadvertence, any man may, once 
in a way, direct his eyes to an opponent's hand ; but, 
if he does it frequently, you cease to play with him. 

* ^ To this class of offences, in so far as regards the 
imposition of a penalty, I consider the lowering of 
cards to belong. 

James Clay." 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



139 



CAED-TABLE TALK. 



I knew one was wont to say in scorn, * He must needs be a wit^e 
man, he speaks so much of himself.'"— Esso.ySf Of Discourse^ by Frais'- 
ois Bacon. 



IS'OTHIXG can be more opposed to fact than the 
popular idea that men who indulge in ''Play" are a 
set of selfish brutes, constantly trying to get the best 
of each other. This may be true of low sharpers ; 
but is not even faintly applicable to members of re- 
spectable play-clubs. 

Thackeray is probably responsible for the false no- 
tions entertained by some respecting club card-rooms. 
In my humble opinion he took far too cynical a view 
of human nature. He could see the bad side but 
not the good. As regards card-players he is prepos- 
terously in the wrong. Of course, where several 
hundred men are banded together, it will necessarily 
happen that all are not of equal moral worth. But 
the black sheep are as well knovrn in clubs, as objec- 
tionable people are in general society. And, since 
they cannot be removed from the club, unless they 
do something very flagrant, they are tolerated and 
disliked. 

The vast majority of ''play" men, exhibit, as a 
rule, many admirable qualities. The nicest sense of 



140 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



honor, the most elegant courtesies of civilized life, 
good fellowship, self-control under trying circum- 
stances, these and many other virtues are as common 
in the card-room as gooseberries on a bush. 

The green cloth lays bare a man's true character 
very readily. I am happy to think that I have 
formed many most sincere and lasting friendships 
at the card-table. And, it has been my privilege to 
know the fine feelings, and the sterling good quahties 
of my play friends, to a degree which would have 
been seldom possible in the case of others ; for they 
were revealed to me in the card-room, which is a very 
Castle of Truth for those who choose to frequent it, 
with their eyes and ears open. 

One of these friends was — Jaxles Clay. He was an 
old associate of my father's, and conseqtiently I knew 
him before having the privilege of being admitted a 
member of the Portland Club. 

Till then he had inspired me with a feehng of 
boyish awe, as being the greatest of living AVhist- 
players ; and, when I first played with him, must 
admit I was half afraid of him. But he soon put me 
at my ease. 

It was not long before he found out that I had 
made a study of the laws of games. I need hardly 
add that we discussed Whist and its laws frequently 
and freely. 

The next step was that he, niy senior, and the 
undisputed Chancellor of the Whist-Table, paid me 
the high compliment of consulting me in diflBcult cases 
that were submitted to him for decision. As Jeames 
says in his Diary," Phansy my phelinx I 

When ''The Laws of Short Whist," edited by 



CABD-TABLE TALK. 



141 



Mr. Baldwin, were under consideration, Clay, whc 
was Chairman of the Committee that framed the 

Code, several times did me the honor of asking my 
opinion, although I was not a member of the Com- 
mittee. I may, without egotism, assume that Clay 
thought my judgment worth something, or he would 
not have troubled to vmite to me as follows : — 

Brighton and Sussex Club, 
''Aug. 12, 1863. 

'' My dear JoNBSr — I am begining to waver in my 
opinion as to the substitution of ' touched ' for * taken 
up and looked at' [in the laws relating to deahng]. 
There is much to be said for the change. Many per- 
sons think that the law is so at present. It would be 
a great gain to keep every one's hands off the table. 
Nothing is easier than to leave a thing alone. It 
would prevent interruptions to the dealer and unfair 
tricks with the cards. Look at this case. I have seen 
it more than once. The dealer is dealing your hand 
and mine pretty close together. He has dealt one of 
my cards in an uncertaiu position — equi-distant from 
either hand. I immediately draw my cards towards 
me. The position of the card is no longer uncertain. 
It is close to your cards and distant from mine. Long 
odds you take it up. and your partner has lost his 
deal. I am disposed to be severe on ' traps ' which 
there is no penalty for setting, and to avoid falhng 
into which more than ordinary care is required. A 
game is not tolerable if more than reasonable care is 
required. Why ! I can't look round to bet, or take 
5 to 2 from a bystander, or make civil answer to a 
question, if my eyes, even during the deal, are to be 



142 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



always on the watch. The point is not yet finally 
decided, though the majority is for the change. 
What say you to the foregoing arguments in its 
f»av0r ? 

Yours very truly, 

James Clay." 
I have several similar letters, e,g» : — 

Feby. 20, 1867.. 

My DEAR Jones, — The decision is improved by 
beginning as you propose. * It is a question of fact.' 
It is no part of your duty to say how that fact is to 
be ascertained. Leave out by all means 'the con- 
science of the player,' for fear of accidents. 
Yours very truly, 

James Clay." 

Of course we became very intimate, and my attach- 
ment for Clay was constantly augmented by kind- 
nesses I shall never forget. I will mention some 
instances : — 

When I was a mere boy Clay thought proper to 
caution me against plunging. May be I had been 
betting ; I do not remember. But I do recollect say- 
ing I never backed myself for any sum worth men- 
tioning unless I had been winning, and the looser 
invited me to give him a chance of getting it back. 
Clay concluded the conversation by saying, '* IN'ever 
win too much of a man at one sitting." 

Again : — An Elderly Gentleman, my adversary, 
opened a hand at Whist by leading queen, holding 
only queen and one small one. He lost the odd trick 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



143 



owing to the original lead being from a weak suit, 
when I said to my partner, That was a very good 
example of the disadvantage of opening a weak suit. 

Had Mr. [the E. G.] led his strong suit originally, 

we must have lost the trick." On which the follow- 
ing conversation ensued : — 

The E. 6^.—" What did you say That I lost the 
odd trick by my bad play ? " 

Ego. — I wasn't speaking to you." 

The E. G. (indignantly). — '*You were speaking at 
me, and you said I lost the odd trick by leading 
queen of diamonds. I had so and so " — (here he 
detailed his hand) — ' ' and with such cards I lead a 
strengthening card. What do you say to that?" 

Ego (sarcastically). — Oh yes ! I know I Q.aeen and 
another is a favorite Portland lead." 

This was a severe thrust at the E. Gr., who was a 
great man at the Portland. Abuse his dear Portland 
Club, the Temple of Whist, and to think that I, a 
mere boy, could know as well as an experienced 
Portlander ! Absurd ! Impertinent ! This was, no 
doubt, what the E. G. thought, not what he said. 
What he did was, as soon as he could, to retire in a 
dignified manner from the table. 

Now there is nothing seriously offensive in my ob- 
servation, The most that can be said is, I was not 
sufficiently respectful, considering the difference in 
our ages, and possibly my tone and manner might 
have contributed . to irritate the E. G. At all events 
he would not speak to me afterwards, and would not 
cut in with me. 

The dissension came to Clay's ears, and he, at once, 
of his own motion set to work to put matters straight* 



144 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



xlfter privately hearing the E, Gr.'s story from him, 
and my version from me, Clay told me I ought to eat 
humble pie. This I at first declined to do, urging 
that I had been guilty of no offence. Clay, however, 
insisted that, being the junior, I ought to give way, 
and added, apropos of the humble pie, ''I mil cut 
the shce so thin for you that you will hardly be able 
to taste it." I then allowed Clay to dictate a concil- 
iatory letter. A day or two afterwards I received the 
following from him : — 

'*My dear JoiS^ES, — I have sent your letter to 

— , and with it the best letter I could think of 

from myself. He is considering the matter, — which 
to my mind requires no consideration, — and if he 
does not answer you cordially, I shall think him very 
wrong. But we must remember that he is as obsti- 
nate as you are. I daresay you both call it ' firm- 
ness.' Yours very truly , 

Jajvies Clax. ' 

The result was eminently satisf actoiy to all parties, 
One more reminiscence of Clay's kindness. He spent 
hours and hours with me, when he could ill afford it 
(his time being fully occupied with parhamentary 
duties), in assisting me with various books. My 
Ecarte and especially Piquet are much indebted to 
him. It was mainly through his support that my 
Laws of Piquet, or rather his and mine, were adopted 
by the Portland Club. 

A committee was formed finally to revise the 
Piquet Laws. I pressed him to allow his name to be 
put on the Committee. For some days he refused on 
the ground of want of time. But I eventually per- 



CARD-TABLE TAIiK. 



145 



Buaded him to act, by pointing out the great value 
that would accrue to the laws if his name were ap- 
pended to them. 

It was, of course, important to get the sanction of 
the Turf Club to the Piquet Laws. And here, Clay's 
name was all poAverful. Their adoption was proposed 
at a General Meeting of the Turf Club. This was 
carried, and the laws were agreed to en bloOy chiefly, 
as I was afterwards informed by Mr. Baldwin, be- 
cause they were approved by Clay. 

Our friendship continued uninten-uptedly until at 
last, poor dear Clay was stricken with paralysis. 
Even then he did not lose his cheerfulness, and his 
head remained clear throughout. I saw him for the 
last time about a week before his death. We talked 
Whist, and he gave me his opinion on some point of 
play, and added that, if he could only get on his legs 
again, he would be able to play Whist as well as 
ever. 

When the end came the world lost a Whist genius, 
and I lost what can never be replaced — a true friend. 



I am often asked my opinion of Clay's play. 

In the first place, what particularly struck me was 
the extreme brilliancy of his game. Of this, the fol- 
lowing coup played by him, is, to my thinking, a 
beautiful illustration. 

The cards lie thus : — Clay has knave, eight, four of 
clubs (trumps); and ace, king, and tv>^o small dia- 
monds. Diamonds have never been led. There are 
three other trumps in, viz : nine, six, and three, and 
they are all in the hand to Clay's right. This is cer- 
10 



146 



CARD-^ABIiE TALK. 



Cain, as the other players have not followed suit in 
trumps. 

Clay has the lead, and requires every trick to save 
the game. 

It is clear that, if his right hand adversary plays 
properly, that player must eventually make a 
trick in trumps. It is also demonstrable that if Clay 
makes the usual lead of king and ace of diamonds, 
the right-hand adversary must make a trick. 

In this position I venture to say that ninety-nine 
players, — and good players, — out of a hundred would 
lead king of diamonds, which is the book play. Not 
so Clay. He observes that his only chance is to de- 
part from rule. He must put the lead into his part- 
ner's hand, find him with a forcing card, and the 
right-hand adversary must make the mistake of 
trumping it. Clay, therefore, throws rule altogether 
aside, and leads a small diamond, as though he were 
playing dummy, and saw the cards in his partner's 
hand. 

Clay's partner wins with knave, and leads the best 
spade, which is trumped. Clay overtrumps, and then 
leads another small diamond^ to endeavor to put the 
lead again into his partner's hand. His partner wins 
this trick also, and leads a winning card, which the 
adversary again trumps, is overtrumped, has his last 
trump drawn, and the ace and king of diamonds 
make. 

The hands are subjoined, as it is not easy to appre- 
ciate the coup from mere description : — 

A.— Clay. | B. i ^ 

Knv. 8, 4 . ^ 5» 4 . • ^ | lo, 9, 6 . . 4 9, 6, 3 . .J' 

Ace, Kg, 5, 2 ^ 6, 5 . . ^\ Qn, Knv, 6, 3 . .-v ! Qn 3 . . ^ 

8, 7,4. ! 10.9 . . <^ 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



147 



Take another example. When a youngster I was 
looking over Clay, and late in the hand he led queen 
from queen, knave, nine, and a small card. This 
was the old-fashioned lead ; but a small card is now 
led from queen, knave, nine, &c. I afterwards asked 
Clay whether he considered the old lead, as given by 
Hoyle, preferable to the modern one. He said, No ; 
I generally lead the small one ; but when I had the 
lead, the cards must lie lucky for us or we lose the 
odd trick." By this he meant that, unless the king 
lay to his left or the ten to his right, and one of the 
finesses succeeded, the odd trick could not be won. 

I have won many an odd trick since by acting on 
a similar principle, and always think of Clay when 
it comes off. 



In the second place, though no one knew better 
than Clay when to depart from rule, no one was more 
regular in his observance of rule. He combined the 
carefulness of the old school with the dash and bril- 
liancy of the new. 

Whist-players owe more to Clay than to any other 
man, in consequence of his educating his generation 
to adhere to rule. He taught his contemporaries the 
advantage of playing on system. The game has de- 
veloped since his day, and I am bold enough to hold 
the opinion that there are now living better players 
than he ever was. But he, by his example, showed 
them how to become better players. There are many 
men, at the present day, who know more mathematics 
than Newton ^ver did ; but Newton showed them 
the way. Or, magna componere parvis, there are 



148 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



now finer billiard-players than old John Roberts 
ever was, but he was the billiard genius whom they 
have all copied, and from whom they drew their 
inspiration. Cook would never have made a break 
of 936, had not Roberts, by his teaching, paved the 
way for him. 



As to Clay's manner of playing. I have heard him 
called a slow player. That, however, is hardly cor- 
rect. He should rather have been called a deliberate 
player. His system was to play every card at the 
same pace. Hesitation is often to the player's disad- 
vantage ; and Clay's object, in playing deliberately, 
was that his pause, when doubtful as to the correct 
play, should not be taken for hesitation, but should 
be attributed to his natural habit of machine- like 
play. 



There was one exception to this habit of playing 
dehberately. Clay seldom played a card contrary to 
rule in order to take in the adversary, or, as it is 
technically called, a false card. To quote his own 
words : — 

I hold in abhorrence the playing false cards. I 
freely admit that to this practice there is great and 
frequent temptation ; * * * for there is great en- 
joyment, when your trick succeeds, in having taken 
in your adversary, and having won the applause of 
an ignorant gallery, while, if 3^ou have played in the 
common-place way, even your partner scarcely 
thanks you. You have done your duty, nothing more 



C ARB-TABLE TAIiK. 149 



— and he had a right to expect it of you. ^ * « j 
do not, however, go the length of saying that false 
cards should never be played, but I prescribe to my- 
self, and advise to you, the following limits to the 
practice." 

The limits laid down by Clay were as follows : — 
You are justified in playing false . with a partner so 
bad that regularity in your play affords him no in- 
formation ; or, when your partner is so weak all 
round that you can do harm by deceiving him ; or, 
in the last three or four tricks of the hand, when if 
your partner holds a particular card you attain the 
result you desire, and, if not, your deceiving him is 
of no consequence ; or, when the so-called false card 
is false as against the adversary but not as against 
the partner. 

I have been tempted to make this digression re- 
specting false cards, because the case, as put by Clay, 
is so well worth studying. 

To return : — Clay played, as a rule, deliberately. 
But, when he played a false card, he got his card 
ready before it was his turn to play. 

No doubt he thought that if he appeared to hesi- 
tate, he might be suspected of a false card, and there- 
fore prepared to play rather more quickly than was 
his wont. 



Clay was fond of shuffling the cards very thoroughly 
after every deal. Having suggested to him that so 
much shuffling was likely to produce wild hands, 
which are disadvantageous to good players, he said, 

I do not agree with you at all. I should like to 



150 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



have the cards thrown out of a volcano after every 
deal." 



Clay, though as a rule agreeable at the table, could 
say a severe thing when addressed by men he dis- 
liked. Some of his mots on these occasions are well 
worth recording. 

Under the name of Castlemaine," Clay is de- 
scribed in Bans Merci, as also his manner to **men 
whom he favored not." The incident alluded to is, 
of course, that of his playing Whist with Vincent 
Flemyng, when the latter, having backed himself 
heavily, because he had a tower of strength " for a 
partner, lost the rubber by not leading trumps from 
five trumps to an honor. 

Flemyn's query to Clay, and Clay's reply about 
the eleven thousand young Englishmen who would 
not lead trumps from five, and their consequent con- 
dition of peripatetic impecuniosity, are well known, 
but the passage will nevertheless bear quotation. 

Vincent held the knave and four more trumps. 
If he had only gone off with that suit the game was 
over. * * * True he had not a very powerful 
hand * * * so he led off with his own strongest 
suit, which was trumped by Hardress the second 
round * * * and the critical fifth trick was just 
barely saved. * * * Flemyng said, * I ought to 
have led trumps ; there's no doubt of it.' He looked 
at his partner [Castlemaine] as he spoke, but the 
latter answered never a word till Vincent repeated 
the question pointedly. It has been before stated, 
that Castlemaine's manner to men whom he favored 



GARD-TA^E TALK. 



151 



not, was somewhat solemn and formal. * It has 
been computed,' he said, very slowly, * that eleven 
thousand young Englishmen, once heirs to fair for- 
tunes, are wandering about the Continent in a state 
of utt«r destitution, because they would not lead 
trumps with five an honor in their hands.' The 
ultra- judicial tone of the reply would have been 
irresistibly comic at any other time." 



The following is a parallel to that story. 

The great authority was looking on at Whist when 
the second player, whom he favored not, holding ace, 
king, knave, instead of playing king, as he should 
have done, finessed the knave. 

The queen made, third hand ; ace and king were 
afterwards trumped. 

The player then turned to Clay and asked whether 
the finesse of the knave was justifiable. 

To him, the following crushing rejoinder, spoken 
very deliberately at the wall opposite, instead of to 
the querist : — 

At the game of Whist, as played in England 
(pause), you are not called upon to win a trick (an- 
other pause), unless you please." 



A similar anecdote of Clay got into the papers some 
years ago, but was incorrectly told, and was spoilt in 
the telling. The correct version is as under : — 

A player having asked for trumps, though he did 



152 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



not hold a trump (a most outrageous Whist atrocity), 
his partner said, after the hand, — 

I presume you did not intend to ask, but pulled 
out a wrong card." 

'*No," was the reply, had a very good hand, 
and wanted trumps out." 

Then, turning to Clay, he inquired if, with a ver} 
good hand, his play was defensible. 

Clay threw himself back in his chair and stared at 
the cornice in the next room. He had a long cigai: . 
cocked out of one corner of his mouth, and as he 
spoke, in his ultra- judicial tone," his voice seemed 
to proceed, in a most comical and indescribable man- 
ner, from behind the cigar. He said : — 

" I have heard of its being done once before (pause) 
by a dear old friend of mine (pause)." 

And," innocently pursued the victim, was your 
friend a good judge of Whist? " 

"I am dound to add,'' resumed Clay, as though he 
had wished to conceal the fact, but that the recital of 
it was wrung from him by this question, I am 
bound to add, that he died shortly afterwards (pause, 
then very distinctly (in— a-— lunatic-asylum I" 



Clay was once lamenting to me the number of 
erroneous decisions he had known to be given with 
regard to the Laws of Whist. I said, — 

I don't see what you can do further than refer 
the case to the best judge in the room, and go by his 
decision, right or wrong." 

I think abetter plan would be," replied Clay, 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



153 



to ask the best judge in the room what ought to 
be done, and then to do just the contrary. You will 
generaUy be right." 



Lord Henry Bentinck was another player, of the 
past generation, of high repute. 

At the time referred to many of the best players of 
the day belonged to the Portland Club, where Lord 
Henry usually played. He, with perhaps a pardon- 
able feeling of superiority that excellence gives, was 
not very willing to admit fine play on the part of his 
confrtres, and especially on the part of Clay. 

He was no doubt a fine player, but tenax propositi 
to a degree that militated against very perfect Whist. 
For instance, when he had made up his mind not to 
be forced in trumps, I have seen him allow a whole 
suit to be brought in against him, rather than take 
the force. ^ 

Again, he made no distinction between partners, 
playing the same game with a good as with a bad 
one, whereas, players of the highest class vary their 
game to suit their partners. 

His strong point was his accurate observance of the 
fall of the cards. He was very particular about the 
play of the small cards, and this, no doubt, led him 
to conceive the idea of the call for trumps, which was 
his invention (see Clay's Short Whist," pp. 100, 
101). 

The following is an instance of his regard for small 
cards. A newly-elected member of a Whist club, 
whose reputation as a player had preceded him. 



154 



CARD-TABLE TABK. 



on sitting down to a rubber there for the first time, 
was looked over by Lord Henry and another member, 

Col. F . After a hand or two, the new comer 

having queen, nine, eight, six of one suit, and queen, 
nine, eight, three of another, led originally from the 
latter. The rule being to lead the strongest suit, and 
the six being a higher card than the three, in strict- 
ness the former suit should be opened, though in 
actual play it is all but immaterial which suit is 
chosen. 

Immediately after this. Lord Henry walked away 
from the table, with an air that betokened he had 

seen enough. He was followed by Col. F , who 

asked him what he thought of Mr. jN" 's play. 

They told me he could play Whist," softly rephed 
that sarcastic nobleman. 



When his partner, I took care he should have all 
the information about small cards that could be 
given, as witness this hand, which we played to- 
gether : — 

He leads a trump. The second hand plays the six. 
I hold the five, the four, and the three. To the first 
round I play the five ; to the second, the three, thus 
showing that I hold the four, as no Whist-player plays 
a high card when a lower will do as well. This was 
before the echo of the call had been invented. The 
hand continued, and it soon transpired that there 
were four honors against us. My partner having the 
lead, and knowing me still to hold a small trump, 
and that 1 was able to ruif a suit, forced me, instead 



CARD- TABLE TALK. 



155 



of leading a third round of trumps, as he would other- 
wise have done. The trick made by the force event- 
ually enabled us to save the game. 

It was this kind of attention to details that pleased 
Lord Henry, and, unless such minutiae were kept in 
view, he would not concede any merit to his partner's 
play. 

In consequence, I believe, of this coup, — if coup it 
can be called, — Lord Henry paid me what he evidently 
meant for a compliment. Bushe, better known as 
Johnny Bushe, a fine player, and one of the most 
charming men that ever entered a card-room, told 
me he asked Lord Henry, whom he considered the 
best Whist-player in the Portland Club. ' ' They none 
of them know anything about it," replied he, in liis 
peculiarly gentle and biting manner, but I fancy 
young Jones is less ignorant of the game than most 
of the members." 

Considering that at the time Clay, Col. Pipon, 
Petrie, Major Adams, Hermann, Storey, and a dozen 
others almost as good, whose names do not at the 
present moment occur to me, were then habitual 
players at the Portland, this criticism amused Bushe 
immensely, as was evident from the gusto with which 
he used to relate the story. 



In addition to his accurate observation of the fall 
of the cards, Lord Henry had one great virtue as a 
Whist-player, — a virtue that might, with advantage, 
be cultivated more than it is,— he never lectured his 
partner. If you did not discuss the game with him, 



156 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



he did not discuss it with you. If you asked him a 
question you got an answer, generally a cynical one. 
It was your own fault; you brought it upon your- 
self. 

Acting on this experience, I generally played a 
silent rubber with him, except to inquire whether he 
had a card of the suit led when he renounced. On 
one occasion, however, I departed from this rule. 

My hand was ace and a small spade ; king, ten, 
and two small hearts (trumps) ; queen, and two 
small clubs ] and knave, ten, nine, and a small 
diamond. 

I led knave of 'iamonds. Queen was put on 
second hand ; king, third hand ; ace, fourth hand. 

The club was then led through me. I called for 
trumps. The second round of clubs my partner won 
with king ; I completed the call. 

Lord Henry did not lead a trump, but returned the 
diamond suit. I, thinking he had no trump, played 
a very cautious game, and lost the odd trick. Had 
my partner led a trump, we should have won two or 
three by cards. After the hand : — 

Ego, — I called for trumps. Lord Henry. 

Lord H. — You can't call for trumps after you have 
had the lead and not led a trump. 

Now, of course, it was no use arguing ; so I let the 
matter drop. The proposition, however, is a mon- 
strous one from a Whist point of view. I am not 
strong enough to start with a trump ; but my suit 
being established the first round, and being protected 
everywhere, a trump is obviously the lead for us. 

The hand is also a good illustration of Lord Henry's 
style of play. It is a certainty that he saw the call. 



CARD-TABIiB TALK. 



151 



and knew that my suit was established ; but because 
he had a crotchet that you can't call for trumps after 
you have had the lead and have not led a trump, he 
ignored the call and chose to play what he considered 
the game. 



Those who are not Whist-players may require to 
be informed that calling for trumps, — the strongest 
intimation a player can give his partner that he 
wants a trump led, — ^is accomplished by playing an 
unnecessarily high card before a low one. It indi- 
cates very great strength in trumps, a minimum of 
five trumps with one honor, or of four trumps with 
two honors. It is often called an invitation to lead 
trumps ; but it is more than this— it is a royal invita- 
tion — a command. 

Students of Clay will observe that I called for 
trumps with less than the recognized minimum of 
four trumps two honors. But it must be borne in 
mind that general rules only apply to an original 
call, not necessarily to a call late in a hand. An 
original call means four trumps two honors, or five 
trumps one honor as a minimum, with other good 
cards in hand. But the opportunity of leading 
trumps, or of calling for them once passed, and then 
a call being made, means, the fall of the cards has 
shown that a trump lead would be very advanta- 
geous. The caller has a very good hand, and such 
strength in trumps that, considering what cards are 
out, partner's strengthening card from three trumps, 
or a small one fi-om four, will probably land him in a 
great score. 



158 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



It may be interesting to record Lord Henry's opin- 
ion of the comparative values of the scores of three 
and four at Short Whist. 

To non-players it may be premised that there are 
many who prefer the score of three to that of four, 
because at three honors can be counted, but at four 
they cannot. On the question being discussed before 
Lord Henry, he epigrammatically observed, I have 
yet to learn that holding three honors is any bar to 
winning the odd trick." 

This puts the whole case in a nutshell. 



The players of the old school, who learnt their 
Whist at Graham's, held book-whist in great con- 
tempt, and had a way of saying, Whist cannot be 
learnt from books." 

It is true that to become thoroughly conversant 
with the refinements of Whist, frequent practice with 
good players is essential. But a would-be player who 
begins practising with a theoretical knowledge of the 
game, must, one would fancy, have an advantage 
over another, of similar capacity, who allows himself 
to be guided by the light of nature alone. I presume 
no one will contend that a sound precept, orally con- 
veyed, is less sound when printed in a book. 



There are two books on Whist which all who wish 
to learn the game ought to study. I refer, of course, 
to Short Yv^hist," by James Clay, and The Theory 
of Whist," by WiUiam Pole. 

Clay's book is charmingly written, and may be 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



159 



called the most suggestive work on the subject. It 
is eminently graceful and readable, and calculated to 
make people think about Whist, if they choose to 
read between the hues. 

The chapter, however, on intermediate sequences 
ought to be expunged, as it perpetuates a view which 
Clay afterwards relinquished. 

I argued the point there discussed, with Clay, some 
time after the appearance of his book, and he was 
generous enough to admit that the penultimate lead 
from five-card suits (which he opposes in the chapter 
referred to) is right. He wound up by saying, You 
have convinced me. When I play with you at the 
Portland I shall adopt your system." 

Had Clay lived to re-edit his Short Whist," he 
would certainly have advocated the penultimate lead, 
especially as the advantages of it were soon recog- 
nized by many players, and it is now (1879) generally 
adopted by club players. 

Dr. Pole's Theory of Whist" is an admirable 
book for beginners. It contains, particularly, the 
best essay extant on the reasons for leading originally 
from the long suit. 



Clay says Talking over the hand after it has been 
played is not uncommonly called a bad habit, and 
an annoyance. I am firmly persuaded that it is 
among the readiest ways of learning Whist, and I 
advise beginners, when they have not understood 
their partner's play, or when they think that the 
hand might have been differently played with a 



160 



CAKD-TABIiE TALK. 



better result, to ask for information and invite dis- 
cussion." 

At the same time it must be admitted that many 
players consider it an affront to talk over a hand, 
especially the Kestcrs of the card-table, who seem to 
regard any inquiry, — except as to whether they hold 
a card of the suit led when they renounce^ — as an im- 
putation on their skill. 

When trying to learn Whist, I once asked an old 
gentleman, one of the soundest players of his time, 
if he would exx)lain his object in leading a certain 
card. I asked in a deferential manner, desiring to 
obtain information. 

The old gentleman looked fiercely at me over 
his spectacles for a few moments, and then said, in an 
angry tone, as though I had grossly insulted him. 

Why, Sir, because nobody but a born fool would 
have played anything else ! ' ' 

No doubt some men do bore one very much by the 
way they criticise without rhyme or reason at the 
end of every hand. 

One of these bores is the " if you had " partner, who 
constantly gTeets you with ' ^ if you had only done so- 
and-so we should have made so-and-so. 

My favorite retort to the if you had " partner is 
to ask if he has ever heard the story of your uncle 
and your aunt." 

If he has, he does not want to hear it again, and 
is silent. If he has not, and innocently falls into the 
tiap by expressing a desire to hear it, I say, in a 
solemn voice, — 

If your aunt had been a man, she would have 
been your uncle ! " 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



161 



On one occasion I set down an '*if you had" 
partner thus : — I led a small heart from ace, ten and 
two small ones. Queen was put on, second hand ; 
my partner won with king and led trumps. All the 
trumps being out, my partner returned the nine of 
hearts, which I finessed. The nine won the trick, 
and it was now evident that I had the tenace, in t^vo 
senses, over the knave guarded, to my right hand. 

My partner had no more hearts, and so could not 
continue the suit. He, therefore, opened his own 
strong suit. 

I won the first trick in it, and was then in doubt 
whether to return his suit or to lead the ace of hearts, 
making a certain trick, but parting with the tenace. 
It was a question of judgment, depending on the 
score and on the exact values of the cards already 
played in other suits. At all events, after considera- 
tion, I deemed it better, in this particular hand, to 
return my partner's suit. It turned out unluckily, 
and at the end of the hand I was saluted with the 
usual **0h ! Partner ! if you had only led out your 
ace of hearts. Why didn't you ? " &c., &c. I replied 
somewhat curtly, 'M didn't know it was the best ! " 
This answer so turned the tables on my partner that 
he did not ** if you had " me again for some time. 



A companion to the if you had" player is the 
it didn't matter" player, 

My partner trumps my best card, or does not 
trump a doubtful card after I have called for trumps, 
or commits some other whist enormity. "VVe win the 



162 



CARD-TABIiB TALK. 



game notwithstanding, for we have prodigious cards. 
If I suggest that there was no occasion to perpetrate 
the enormity in question, my partner triumphantly 
informs me It didn't matter." 

This view is altogether fallacious. It did not 
happen to matter in that particular hand ; but my 
confidence is impaired and it will matter in every 
hand I play with that partner for a long time to 
come. 

Again : A point arises whereon my partner does 
not give me information by his play, as to the cards 
he holds, when he might have done so. He then 
tells me he knew we had the game, so '*it didn't 
matter." 

But presently, a similar point presents itself, only 
I cannot be sure whether my partner knows we have 
the game or not. I am in the dark. My partner's 
carelessness in the former instance, prevents my 
drawing the inference that he cannot hold such and 
such cards, otherwise he would have informed me. 
He still continues to think his previous play didn't 
matter." I know it does matter. 



The **it didn't matter " players would do well to 
bear in mind a remark of Clay's to a good player who 
was playing his cards anyhow, because he had game 
in his hand and it didn't matter." 

" You might as well," said the great Whist Master, 
*'have played in the ordinary way. ''for the sake of 
uniformity 

There is more Whist-wisdom in that observation 
than many people would suspect. 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



163 



To enumerate all the Whist-nuisances one meets 
in the course of a long experience, would require a 
volume. The if you had " player and the it didn't 
matter" player are bad enough, but there are many 
much worse. 

There is the gentleman (?) who whenever his 
partner leads a king, jduIIs out a card, and before 
playing it, says, ^' Your king, partner ? " Of course 
this means, My dear sir, I have the ace." 

Granting that the player in question has no sinister 
motive, and that he does not intentionally desire to 
draw his partner's attention to the fact that he can 
win the trick, he is a nuisance nevertheless. 



Everyone has met the player who, whenever he 
was about to lead trumps, draws his card and holds 
it by the corner face-downwards on the table. He 
then looks his partner full in the face, and says, 

What's trumps, partner?" And being replied to, 
he plays his card with a bang. 

This being interpreted of course means Partner I 
I have led a trump ; return it on the first opportu- 
nity." 



Again, there is the noisy blustering fellow who 
leads with a bang a king, not trumps, and before it 
is played to draws another card, and plays again 
with violence, almost before the first trick {Ms of 
course) is completed. 

Translated into plain English this means ' * Atten- 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



tion I Here's a king, which nobody can beat. Atten 
tion ! partner 1 Here's a trump ! Get out the trumps, 
and return my suit, of which I hold ace, queen, or ace, 
knave, and two or three others." Unfortunately 
there is no rule by which such an earthquake of a 
man can be prevented from having his way, as, 
though intimations are contrary to etiquette, it is 
extremely difficult — if not impossible — to define what 
an intimation is. 



Then there is the player who pulls out his cards one 
after the other and puts them back again before he 
plays, and the player whose eyes are all round the 
table, who is humorously said to play triple dummy, 
and who makes wonderful and successful finesses. I 
have known two triple dummy players to cut as 
partners against an unsuspecting youth and an old 
soldier." The triple-dummy partners had had a 
lengthy inspection of the youth's hand, when the old 
soldier rather astonished them by saying, Partner, 
you had better show me your hand, as both . the 
adversaries have seen it." 



A triple-dummy player once finessed the five of 
trumps against me, to his partner's original lead, he 
being the third player with five and king, and I being 
fourth player with four and ace. 

On a former occasion this identical player was 
rather roughly handled in consequence of a similar 
performance. He led : my partner hesitated and at 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



165 



last played king second hand. The third hand 
played ace and returned the suit, which my partner 
trumped. 

The adversary to my right then said, Really, 

W , it is not proper to hesitate like that when you 

have only one of the suit in your hand." 

I assure you," my partner replied, was not 

hesitating ; I was only waiting till had done 

looking at my hand." 

It is a wonder there was not a row, but affected 

to be satisfied with W 's explanation, that he was 

only in fun. 



once did another very clever thing. He 

became a member of a play-club, where there was a 
bye-law that if honors are scored in error, the adver- 
saries may take them down and add them to their 
own score. 

As a new comer he was courteously informed of the 
existence of the bye-law. 

Excellent rule, indeed," said , capital rule I** 

and sat down to play. 

After a hand or two, his score being three to love, 
he lost two by cards, and observed, smihng to his 
partner, Lucky ! We just saved it ! " 

The adversaries, concluding from the remark ' * just 
saved it " that they were four, marked four, without 
further consideration. But as soon as the score waa 

marked, innocently inquired. Were you four 

by cards that time? " No, two by cards and two 

by honors." '-Honors were divided," said 

blandly, and so they were. think you have a 



166 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



very proper rule here, that under these circumstances 
we score two. Partner, mark a double." 



Clay told me that when he first played Whist at a 
London club he was horrified to see an old gentle- 
man deliberately looking over one of his adversaries^ 
hands. Mr. Pacey, the player whose hand was over- 
looked, was, as it happened, an old friend of Clay's, 
and, the rubber being over, Clay took an immediate 
opportunity of advising him to hold up his hand 

when playing against P , adding. 

The last hand he saw every card you held." 

''Oh, no, he didn't! " replied Mr. Pacey, who was 

well aware of P 's pecuharities, *'he only saw 

a few I put in the corner to puzzle him ! " 



Scene, a Whist Club. Dramatis Personce: Col. Gr. 
B , Major B . 

A rubber is about to commence. The Colonel cuts 
in, and has the deal against him. The Major does 
not play, but looks on and bets. 

Major* — I back the deal for five. 

Col, — I take it. 

The Colonel wins the first game. The Major, 
pursuing his usual tactics, when the side he backs is 
losing, immediately slopes off to another table. The 
Major's memory about his bets is rather uncertain. 

The Colonel loses the next two games in two hands ; 
the cards being thrown down each hand, it would 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 167 



seem very unlikely to anyone not looking on that he 
could have lost the rubber so quickly. 

CoL (calling out). — Major, that's a fiver. 

Major (from the other end of the room). — I had no 
bet. 

CbZ.— Yes, you had I You bet me a fiver. 
Major,— Oh, no ! I had no bet. 
Col. — But you win a fiver. 

Major (brightening up). — Oh, yes I I recollect now. 
I backed the deal. 



In most clubs there is a member who, by his 
habitual sadness and way of looking on the dull 
side of everything, earns the sohriquet of ^'Dismal 
Jemmy." 

In a play-club the Dismal Jemmy constantly takes 
supposed sympathizers by the button-hole, and la- 
ments his unvarying ill-fortune. 

Meeting a Dismal Jemmy in Piccadilly one after- 
noon, as he was emerging from his club, after the 
usual greetings, I said to him, 

"Weill and how have they been treating you 
lately?'' 

Bis. J. (with as near an approach to a smile as he 
ever permitted himself). — I've had the best day to- 
dg.y that I've had for the last three weeks. I have 
only lost haK-a-sovereign ! 

Another specimen of the Dismal Jemmy, is the one 
who makes lugubrious efforts at being funny when 
recounting his sad experiences. He will solemnly 
tell you, for example, when he loses a rubber, that 

the cards with which he can win are not yet manu- 



168 



CARD-TA.BLE TALK. 



facturedj'' lie will inform you with doleful glee of 
the precise sum total of the points he has lost during 
the year, as a unique illustration of the aberrations of 
chance ; and he will wind up by remarking that it is 
fortunate he only plays for trifling stakes. 

On inquiring of one of these gentlemen who take 
their pleasure so sadly, how Fortune had been favor- 
ing him lately : he replied, with a gTim smile, Oh ! 
if I only hve long endugh, and my money holds out, 
perhaps some day my strong suit will be trumps I " 



It is remarkable that men say the rudest things 
across the card-table, — things they would scarcely 
dare to say elsewhere, — without any offence being 
taken. 

Sometimes, however, players rush into the oppo- 
site extreme, and take offence too readily, as in the 
following scene : — 

D. — I lead you a trump originally, and you will 
not return it (resignedly) ; of course, we must lose ! 

B, (meekly). — That was my view of the game. 

D. (firing off what he means for a joke). — I hardly 
think it amounts to a view." 

D and B were old friends — men between 

whom more Ucense is permissible than between mere 
acquaintances. They and the set they played with 
often chaffed each other good-naturedly. 

But on this particular occasion B , instead of 

joining in the laugh, got angiy, and was not on 
speaking terms with D for some months. 



The following severe retort was good-humoredly 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



169 



taken ; but, possibly, the retortee did not see to the 
bottom of it. 

S was a very moderate player who fancied " 

himself. Holding only trumps, he dehberately forced 
his partner, contrary to all sound Whist doctrines. 

The consequence was that S lost the game, which 

he would easily have saved had he not violated a 
simple elementary principle. 

F, (S 's partner, a great player, in a tone of in- 
jured remonstrance). — How could you force me, with 
only two trumps ? 

S defended his play, as well as he could, on the 

ground of the score, and of what he considered to be 
the peculiar nature of his hand. 

F, — Well, I cannot think you were justified. 

Here the matter would have dropped, but S , a 

very impetuous creature, lost his temper. 

(firing up). — I don't agree with you, that's all. 

Now, if F had said, don't value your 

opinion," or don't think it worth having," S 

would have been furious. But F managed to say 

this in another way. 

F, (after a pause, and very slowly, with a philo- 
sophic air) . — 1 really don't know whether I should 
prefer to hear you say that you do agree with me, or 
that you do not agree with me. 

This was very neatly put. But it requires some 
looking into to see the sneer of it. It made no more 

impression on the pachydermatous S than, as 

Sydney Smith observed, tickling the dome of St. 
Paul's would make on the Dean and Chapter. 



170 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



The same player (F ) was once being lectured by 

another moderate performer of the S school. 

F listened till his tormentor had finished, and 

then, in a most polite manner, without the least ap- 
pearance of irritation or tone of sarcasm, (which, to 
my mind, made his reply pecuharly incisive), said : — 
I hear your argument with respect, — but, — with- 
out conviction." 



As a contrast to the above, the following may be 
related. It is one of the most graceful speeches I ever 
heard at the Whist-table. It was made by the first 
Lord Lytton, a man of most polished manners. I 
was playing Whist with him at the Portland, a good 
many years ago, when it was the fashion to wear 
hanging sleeves. During the rubber the king of 
hearts mysteriously disappeared, and after a time it 
dropped on the table, out of Lord Lytton's sleeve. 

He said with a smile, I am very glad to think 
that I am playing with gentlemen who know me.'' 



Scene, a Whist Club. — A member who has been 
dining out, not wisely but too well," cuts in. 

A B (a very good player) leads a heart : 

Diner-out (his partner) has king, knave and another, 
and puts on the knave, king being the usual play. 
It turns out very badly. After the hand. 

Diner-out (to his partner). — Think I was right 
t' fin'sse knave 'v hearts? 

A. B, (with a good-humored chuckle and a glance 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



171 



round the table) . — I generally put on the king before 
dinner ; after dinner I sometimes play the knave ! 



^ * It requires a very good player to win his partner's 
trick ; " that is, of course, if he can avoid it. 

I have often been stung into this remark by the 
eccentricities of my partners. This is the style of 
thing. Ace is led ; I (second hand) play small ; the 
others play small cards. The suit is continued. I 
(second hand) play queen. My partner hesitates, 
looks feebly at the ceiling, like Dickens' waiter, rubs 
his forehead, and asks to look at the last trick. He 
then pulls out one card, puts it back and pulls out 
another. All this time the mountain is in labor ; I 
know from experience the sort of mouse about to be 
brought forth. At last, out comes the king on my 
poor queen, with a triumphant dash, and the knave 
follows, my partner looking wondrous wise, as 
though he would cry Eureka." 

I have a good hand, only wanting to know my 
partner with the best of the adversary's suit to lead a 
trump, and make a fine score. But my partner by 
taking the lead from me gets his knave trumped by 
his right hand opponent, who leads a suit his partner 
trumps, and so the game is saved. 

Such a partner, oddly enough, never dreams of 
taking the lead if by so doing he can give me the ten- 
ace at the end of a hand. Thus : a small trump is 
led from a suit of four to the queen j I, second hand, 
play the seven; the third hand plays king, and 
wins the trick. A small trump is returned ; my 



172 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



partner puts on ten ; the original leader, supposing 
liie to hold a tenace or the ace single, plays a small 
card ; I play eight, and remain with ace, nine ; 
queen and a small one being to my right. When 
three cards remain in each hand, I, second player, 
win the trick in a plain suit; my partner, having 
none of the suit and the knave of trumps, leaves the 
lead with me, though he ought to know from the fall 
of the cards that I remain with two trumps over the 
original leadb.. 
These two cases happened in one rubber. 



It is common enough in domestic circles, when 
people are asked to make up a rubber, to hear them 
dechne at first on the plea that they really know 
nothing about the game. After a little pressing, they 
possibly agree to oblige by taking a hand if nobody 
else will, at the same time repeating their protesta- 
tions of inability, and hoping they may not be 

blown-up." 

One generally does expect even the know-nothings 
to be able to deal and to follow suit, unless they are 
actually coerced into sitting down. 

But I once played Whist at the house of a relative 
of mine with a gentleman who did not possess even 
this elementary knowledge. 

A fourth being very much wanted, Mr. B 

F , after vainly protesting that he preferred 

looking on," that he scarcely ever touched a card,'* 
and so forth, consented to make us up. 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



173 



The cards \vere cut ; he was told it was his deal. 
Taking up the pack, he said to his partner : — 
Do you deal out ail the cards at this game ? " 



I have met various partners almost as simple as the 
one who did not know how to deal. 

Being asked by one of these to give him a good 
general rule for Whist, I told him when he had the 
original lead and five trumps, always to lead one ; 
adding that he would be right forty-nine times out of 
fifty, and that experience alone could tell him the ex- 
ceptional cases. 

"We cut in. He was my partner. He had the lead, 
six trumps, tierce major, led another suit, and in con- 
sequence we only scored four instead of winning the 
game. 

*'If you do not like my rule," I remarked, ''of 
leading a trump from five, at least you might pay me 
the compHment of following it when you are my 
partner." 

You told me," he replied, " to lead trumps from 
five, I had six trumps, not five. How was I to know 
the rule applied to six ? You should have said ' five 
or more I ' " 



It is by no means uncommon at the Whist-table, if 
you have every trick in your hand, and your partner 
is puzzling his brain as to which card he shall play, to 
give him a hint, especially if he is habitually a slo^.v 
player, ihat it is quite immaterial which card he pulls 
out if he will only go on. 



174 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



This often assumes the form of playful satire ; but, 
in the following instance, it was taken au grand 

My partner was Sir B. P , a benevolent looking 

old gentleman, who, I soon discovered, scarcely knew 
a spade from a diamond. However, we had very 
good cards, and finding myself with game in my 
hand, while my partner was pondering what card to 
play, I remarked, according to the time-honored 
Whist Joe Miller : — 

Play the one nearest your thumb." 

He looked much surprised, then said quite seri- 
ously : — * * Sir, you must not tell me which card I am 
to play ! " 



Playing with a stranger at an evening party, I, in 
the middle of a hand, seeing that the game was gone 
unless my partner held good trumps, led knave of 
trumps from knave and another. Second hand put 
on ace ; my partner played king, I laid down my 
hand, observing, We cannot save it." My partner 
then put down his cards, amongst which were several 
trumps. **'0h! " I said, "I suppose you pulled out 
the wrong card." *'No," replied my partner, I 
have always been told to play highest third hand." 



Another instance of Whist innocence. 

Some thirty years ago (1850), the call for trumps 
was not so generally practised as it is now. At the 
time I speak of I remember an old club player's sit- 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



175 



ting down to a rubber with a new comer for a part- 
ner. The new comer, a very indifferent performer, 
played his small cards anyhow, and thus uncon- 
sciously called for trumps. He had but a poor hand, 
and when it was over, his partner observed, I 
hardly think with your hand, that you were justified 
in asking for trumps." 

I assure you," replied the stranger, did not 
ask for a trump. I should consider it very irregular 
to ask for a trump or for any other suit ; but, as a 
matter of fact, I never opened my mouth 1 " 



G , who loved to make a litle ruff, always led a 

single card with that object. On one occasion, seeing 
a single card in his hand, he led it as a matter of 
course, without noticing that he had no trump. His 
partner won the trick and returned the suit. At the 
end of the hand his partner quietly remarked : — 

In future, G , when you lead a singleton, I 

shall understand it means you have no trump." 

G was always very indignant if this coup was 

referred to, and even went so far as to characterize 
it as an invention. But I was present when it oc- 
curred, and G 's partner was my father. 



Some of the Whist Innocents feel very much hurt 
if their knowledge of the game is called in question. 
The following is a case in point : 

Vidtim (mildly). — I led a diamond, and you, with 



176 



CARD-TABLK TALK. 



ace, queen, third hand, put on the ace. Surely the 
queen is the usual card. 

Innocents — No doubt; but I won the trick with 
the ace. 

Victim* — If you had finessed the queen, it would 
have won the trick just the same. 

Innocent, — How can I tell where the king is ? 

Victim (sarcastically). — Well, perhaps I may be 
wrong, but with the ace, queen, the third hand gen- 
erally finesses. It is the only chance you have of 
finessing in the suit. 

Innocent (carefully avoiding any reference to the 
word finesse). — I don't deny that, but the ace — 

Victim (interrupting). — Oh! never mind. One 
would think you do not know what finessing means. 

Innocent (waxing indignant). — ]S"ot know what 
finessing means ! Of course I do. It's playing a card 
you haven't got I 



The Whist Innocent occasionally gets out of his 
difficulties with a clever repartee, which stifles dis- 
cussion. 

On one occasion the Innocent holding ace, king, 
queen, &;c., of clubs, ace, king, &c., of hearts, one 
small spade, and three small trumps, led the king of 
clubs, and then proceeded with the single spade. 

Of that suit his partner ha.d only ace, queen. He 
finessed the queen, which was taken by the king, 
fourth hand. The suit was returned. The Innocent, 
now second player, trumped it, and his partner's ace 
fell to the trump. After the hand there is a conver- 
sation r — 



CARD-TABLE TALK, 



177 



Fic^*m (tremulously, but gently). — Partner, why 
not continue with your strong suit, instead of leading 
a singleton. I confess I can't understand your play. 

Innocent (con spirito). — Well, if you can't under- 
stand it, it is of no use my endeavoring to explain it 
to you. 



Clay's remarks on cutting in with those whose play 
is not known to us are excellent, and are applicable 
to the foregoing stories. He says, **If I am thrown 
among players of whom I know nothing, I feel that 
I play to a great disadvantage. I am like a boy on 
the first day of going to a new school, not knowing 
whom to like, whom to trust, and whom to distrust, 
from whom to expect assistance and honest advice, 
or from whom to dread a hoax." 



In contrast to the foregoing, let me give an example 
of how Whist ought to be played. 

I led from five trumps. After two rounds the fall 
of the cards showed that all the remaining trumps 
were with my partner and myself, two in his hand 
and three in mine. One other suit had been played 
and was exhausted from our hands. 

I now had three trumps, including the winning 
trump, and three cards in each of the unplayed suits. 
Not liking to open a suit of three cards, and having 
no indication as to my partner's suit, I led a losing 
trump, that my partner might get the lead and open 
his strong suit. He could have won the trick, but 
played a lower trump. 

12 



17S 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



I knew from his not winning the trick that he also 
had three cards in each of the unplayed suits, as he 
would have penetrated my design, and if he had had 
a four-card suit would have won the trick. At the 
end of the hand, I said, When you did not win my 
third trump, I saw we could do no good, as you must 
hold three cards in each of the unplayed suits." 

Yes," herephed, I knew that very well when 
you led a losing trump ; for you must hold three 
cards in each of the other suits." 

Thus we each counted the number of cards the 
other held in two suits, neither of which had been 
played. 

This is Whist. 

My partner was E T F , the finest 

Whist-player I have ever met. 



Matthews, whose Whist was very good, considering 
it was written in the beginning of this century, says : 
" Observe silently and attentively the different sys- 
tems of those with whom you commonly play ; few 
but have their favorite one, the knowledge of which 
will give you a constant advantage." And again : 
I must also repeat my advice to proficients to vary 
their play according to the set they are engaged with ; 
and recollect, it would be of no advantage to speak 
French hke Voltaire, if you lived with people who 
are ignorant of the language." 

Mogul," again, in The Field (February 23, 1867), 
remarks : It would be absurd for players to say 
that certain points of play cannot be allowed as right, 
^ although sound in principle, because partners may 



card-tabijE talk. 



179 



mistake their meaning. If their partners are good 
players, they will not make the mistake ; if they are 
doubtful players, then all refined points of play 
should be avoided. For it must be borne in mind 
that, to rightly estimate the strength of your partner's 
and opponents' play, and to play accordingly, is one 
of the highest qualities of a Whist-player." 

Many good players conduct their hands in precisely 
tne same way, irrespective of the class of partner to 
whom they may be sitting opposite. There are but 
few who are very skilful in helping lame dogs over 
stiles. 

E T F is one of these few. He is the 

best player, with a bad partner, that I know. The 

lame dogs say, ' ' I like playing with F because I 

understand his game," the fact being that F is 

the only man in the club who can understand the 
lame dog's game, and can play down to his level 
accordingly. 

Homer sometimes nods • and it so happens that I 

can give an example where F did not play his 

partner. 

F (leader) has two cards in hand, viz., the last 

trump and a losing club. Clubs have never been 
led. Each of the other players has two clubs. Y/hat 
ought F to lead ? 

U the third player is very good, the proper lead is ^ 
the losing card, and especially if the second hand is a 
muff, as the muff will probably not put on ace second 
hand, not having count d the trumps, and the third 
hand may make the king. Also, if the third hand 
has ace, queen, he, being a good player, will not 



180 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



Fer contra, if the third hand is a muff, the propei 
lead is the trump. 

F led the losing club. The third hand was 

a muff, and holding ace, queen, finessed the queen. 
The fourth hand made the king. The third hand 

then got a mild lecture for finessing (for F never 

blows up his partner), or rather for not counting the 

trumps. But, in fact, F should have lectured 

himself, for not playing his man, as I told him after- 
wards privately. 



Another example, and perhaps a better one, occurs 
to me. Three cards remain in each hand. I (leader) 
have king, ten, and a small trump. The other 
players have nothing but trumps, except my partner, 
who has two trumps and a thirteen card. Ace turned 
up to my left. We are three, the adversaries four, 
and each side has five tricks. If my partner has 
queen, knave of trumps, we win the game, whatever 
I play. 

If the ace, queen of trumps, are against us we must 
lose the game whatever I play. 

But if my ]3artner has queen and a small trump 
only, the problem is how to make two of the remain- 
ing three tricks. 

I led the king of trumps. The second hand, with 
ace, knave, and a small one passed it, considering 
the queen must be in my hand. 

I then led the small trump. 

The.second hand put on knave, saying, Now I've 
got you ! " His blank amazement at finding his 
knave taken by my partner's queen, and the game 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



181 



saved, was very comical to behold, and caused a 
shout of laughter, in wliich, however, my left hand 
adversary did not join. 

I should add that this gentleman was very prone 
to hold up ace, knave, and I felt sure he would do so 
here, if he had the knave. But I think the play 
wrong, as had 1 held king and queen of trumps, at 
this particular point of the game my best lead would 
be queen, and if that was passed, the small one. 



Among the numerous letters I receive about Whist, 
instances of unusual distribution of cards are not in- 
frequent : as, for example, that A dealt himself 
thirteen trumps 3 or had three consecutive hands 
without a trump ; or that B and C had all the trumps 
between them. These letters are generally accom- 
panied by a permission to pubhsh the facts (which 
are well authenticated), or by the question whether 
such a case ever happened before, and sometimes by 
a request to calculate the odds against such an oc- 
currence. 

The obvious reply is that one named hand or com- 
bination is no more improbable than another, and 
that curious hands which illustrate no principle of 
play are not worth the trouble of calculating. 

The following singular combination of cards is, 
however, worth recording as it may be' made to point 
a moral. It came under my observation at the Port- 
land, Clay and my father being partners. 

The game was four-all. The dealer turned up a 
small heart. Clay led a diamond. The secondhand 



182 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



had ace, king, queen, knave, ten, nine, and two of 
trumps. With these cards the problem is how to loso 
the odd trick. 

The second hand contrived it in this way. He had 
no diamond, and trumped the card led with the 
deuce of hearts. 

My father (third hand) also had no diamond, and 
only one trump, the three, with which he over- 
trumped. 

In the end the holder of the sixieme major only 
made his six trumps, his adversaries having six win- 
ning cards in the unplayed suits, which neither of the 
opponents could trump. They therefore lost the odd 
trick and the game. 

Had the second hand (B ) trumped with the 

nine originally, he must have won the game, how- 
ever the cards lay. For, his . partner being dealer, 

held the trump card, and consequently B , by 

then leading trumps, must make seven tricks, even 
if all the remaining trumps are in one hand against 
him. 

IS'o doubt B regarded the chance of the third 

hand's having none of the suit in which he himself 
was void as practically nil. ]!severtheless, he might 
have made the game absolutely certain. 

The moral is, Never throw a chance away. 



How many hands can be held at Whist ? 

This question is often asked. It is not difficult to 
calculate the answer. Before doing so, however, it 
is necessary to state accurately what is meant by the 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



183 



question. Does it mean (d) how many different 
hands can an indi\^idual hold ; or (b) how many 
different hands can the four players hold j and (c) 
does it count a different hand if the same hands are 
held by the four players in different orders — e.g», A 
holding B's hand and B holding A's hand, and so on ; 
and (d) does it count a different hand if the same cards 
are held and a different trump card is turned up ? 

The number of different hands that an individual 
can hold is simply the number of ways thirteen things 
can be taken out of fifty-two, without having two 
sets of thirteen alike. The answer to this is 635,013,- 
559,600. 

It is evidently a different Whist-hand if A T B and 
Z one or all interchange an entire hand. It is also 
to my mind a different Whist-hand if a different 
trump card is turned up. 

If this is admitted, the total possible number of * 
Whist-hands that can be held by all the four players 
is 697,381,590,951,354,306,910,086,720,000. 

This result has been multiphed out several times 
by different people and submitted to various tests, 
and it may be rehed on as accurate. The process 
of ^calculation was submitted to the late Mr. Bidder, 
the well-known engineer, whose power over figures 
was of European celebrity, and he agreed that it is 
correct ; only he would not admit that it is a diff erent 
hand if a different card is turned up. Those who 
take this view have only to divide the above number 
by 13, when the result will be the number of possible 
hands if the question d is answered in the negative. 
If the question c is also answered in the negative, it 
will be necessarv further to divide by 24. 



184 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



If aayone- desires to verify the figures given, he 
has only to perform the following httle multiplication 
sum : — 

52 . 51 . 50 3.2.1 

— xlS 

(13 . 12 11 3.2.1)* 



Misprints sometimes read very queerly. In a reply 
of mine to a Loo question, the word looed was 
misprinted loved" with the following comical 
effect ; — 

*^ If you are loved by Miss it is the same as though 
you were loved by anyone else. It makes no differ- 
ence whether you play an unlimited game or not." 



In criticising my Historical Notes on Whist," the 
editor of a London paper blamed me for saying 
nothing about Scotch Whist. 

I wrote to him explaining that Scotch- Whist, or 
Catch-the-Ten, was purposely omitted, as it has no 
more resemblance to Whist than the Scotch fiddle 
has to a violin. 

To my surprise and amusement he inserted my 
letter in his next number. 



The same gentleman also found fault with me for 
quoting from ''Antony and Cleopatra" a passage 
beginning '* My good knave Eros," and saying that 
** knave" was a punning allusion to a knave at 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



185 



cards. My critic contended that when * * Anthony and 
Cleopatra " was written, knave was not used in this 
sense. 

It so happened that the statement was taken from 
Donee's Illustrations of Shakespeare,'' and it was, 
therefore, most hkely right. But not being a pro- 
found philologist, I was at a loss to prove my case. 

As luck would have it, however, I chanced just 
afterwards to find in Cotgrave's French and English 
Dictionary," " Yalet de Piqve, Knave of Clubs." 

Cotgrave was published in 1611. 

** Antony and Cleopatra " was written about 1607. 

So I wrote the editor to the effect that, unless he 
could show the modern signification of the word 
knave to have been acquired between the years 1607 
and 1611., his strictures only exposed his imperfect 
acquaintance with the history of the word. 

He was good enough to insert this also. 



In the advertisement of the American Hoyle" 
the following occurs : — It is not a re-hash of 
Enghsh Games, but a live American book, expressly 
prepared for American readers." 

Finding the hve American book had reached its 
tenth edition in 1877, I ordered a copy, but to my 
surprise was informed that it could not be imported 
in the regular way because some of it was pirated, or 
re-hashed ! 

I was, therefore, obliged to commission a friend to 
smuggle a copy from New York. 

The Whist is a compilation from Pole, Clay, and 
myself. I do not complain of American reprints of 



186 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



my books or articles while there is no International 
Copyright Act. The Americans are within their 
rights in reprinting ; but there is no occasion to add 
gratuitous hes in the advertisements. American 
papers please copy. 

In the present case what is taken from me is very 
little, but it is not acknowledged except in one place, 
where I am playfully called The writer 'Cavendish' " 
(p. 17). Several of the smaller games are taken from 
Bohn and other English books. An article on 
*' Obsolete Card Games " is reprinted from a paper I 
wi'ote years ago in Once a Week." My knowledge 
of the subject was then very imperfect, and, of course, 
all my mistakes are copied. 

An article on Probabilities at Poker " is acknowl- 
edged as by Dr. Pole and myself. In this article, by 
a slip of the pen, the odds against a straight flush 
with a pack of fifty-two cards, are given as 650,000 to 
. 1. The real odds are 64,973 to 1. The mistake arose 
thus : Dr. Pole, in order to save the trouble of multi- 
plying out, made use of logarithms, and accidentally 
wrote one place of figures too many. 

I cannot say that the re-hasher of the American 
Hoyle is welcome to my articles, but he is heartily 
welcome to the mistakes. 



Why is Piquet so little played in England ? 
. It is generally admitted to be by far the best card 
game for two persons, taking the same position as 
Whist does with regard to four-handed games. 

In France, as everyone knows, Piquet is univer- 
sally played. 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



187 



English indifference to the game may perhaps be 
attributed to its complex nature, a difficulty by no 
means insuperable, unless we are willing to concede 
that we are either less intelligent or more lazy than 
our vivacious neighbors. 

That the French should possess, as it were, a 
monopoly of so beautiful a game, is as regrettable to 
me, as it was to Rowland Hill that the Devil should 
have all the best tunes. 



When Bezique first became the rage, about 1868, 
no two sets of rules agreed. The rules lived dis- 
persedly in many lands, and every minstrel sang 
them differently." In my first little book on the 
subject I gave the principal variations. Shortly after 
I was much amused on receiving a letter, from which 
the following is an extract : — 

I ventured, a few evenings ago, to score aces and 
tens as I won them. My adversary, a lady, * flew 
out ' at me, saying, * Why, in that way, you'll get cut 
before me, and I have several things to declare ; 
surely declarations ought to take precedence of stupid 
old aces and tens.' 

My adversary was so far correct that if I continued 
to mark -those * stupid old aces and tens' I should 
probably score 1,000 first, for I was 940, and she was 
quite 200 behind. I calmly referred her to 'Aces 
and Tens,' p. 12, in * Cavendish's Pocket Guide to 
Bezique ' ; but she said, * I never heard of Bezique 
being played in that way, — never,' And then she 
read out the paragraph, p. 10, headed ' Counting Aces 



188 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



and Tens/ and raised her voice when she came to the 
words, * This is the usual system,' and then stopped 
suddenly, and put the little book in her pocket. 
' There/ she said, * do you hear ? This is the umal 
system. I should think it was the usual system in- 
deed, and I beg you will follow it.' 

When we had finished playing, at my earnest 
request the rules were restored to me, and then I per- 
ceived that my fair opponent had omitted to read the 
words that follow ' this is the usual system,' viz., ' but 
for a better one, see p. 13,' which backs up my system. 
My constitution is not robust enough to stand hot 
arguments before retiring to rest, so I let the matter 
drop." 



*'The fascinatin but slightly onsartin game" of 
Poker has, within the last few years (1878) become a 
favorite in England. In the United States, whence it 
was imported, it is universally played. 

Poker may be described as Brag without improve- 
ments. The great object of each player is to mystify 
everyone else as to the contents of his hand. A 
good Poker-face, one that will not betray the nature 
of a hand by change of countenance, is a valuable 
possession. Chaffing and talking without regard to 
facts (called Poker-talk) , with a view of misleading, 
is permitted, and is considered quite fair. As a round 
game. Poker ranks high ; but it is open to one great 
objection, viz., that the game cannot be played prop- 
erly unless large stakes are engaged. 

An admirable illustration of Poker-talk, lately 
published in an American journal, is worth quot- 
ing 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



189 



* ' Austen attempted to teach Murphy how to play 
Poker. Murphy learnt rapidly, and the stakes, from 
a small beginning of beans, soon developed into bul- 
lion. When the pot had risen to sixteen dollars, 
Murphy got inquisitive. 

Murphy. — S'posin a man has two kings ? 
Austen, — Not such a bad hand, but two pairs is 
better. 

* * Murphy, — Oh I Then s'posin a man has two more 
kings, is that double?" 

[For the information of those who do not play 
Poker, it may be observed that four kings is one of 
the best hands that can be held, but that two pairs is 
only a moderate hand.] 

" Austen. — Thunder I I throw up my hand. You 
are a big fool to have told me. You might have won 
all I have ! 

Murphy raked in the pot, laid down his hand, 
and started home. 

Austen packed up the relinquished cards, ran 
them through, and was heard to exclaim, * Two sixes I 
by all that's blue!'" 



' Of course, it is a standing order at Whist that 
lookers-on should not speak. The Etiquette of Whist, 
says : — 

Bystanders should make no remark, neither 
should they by word or gesture give any intimation 
of the state of the game." 
And the Club Code says : — 

** If a bystander make any remark which calls the 
attention of a player or players to an oversight affect- 



190 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



ing the score, he is liable to be called on, by the 
players only, to pay the stakes, and all bets on that 
game or rubber." 

Before this law was passed there was no penalty 
for drawing attention to oversights in the score ; to 
do so was only an offence against etiquette. 

Clay told me that what he most prided himself on 
in all his card-room experience was his self-control 
under the following circumstances : — 

He laid the long odds. The players he was backing, 
who had won the first game, forgot to mark it. They 
then won the second game, and the rubber, but only 
scored one game, and continued to play. 

The player with whom Clay had previously betted 
then asked him to lay the long odds. 

Clay felt sorely tempted to say, Why, I've won 
the long odds already." Ninety-nine men out of a 
hundred would undoubtedly have done so ; but Clay 
had presence of mind enough to decHne the bet with- 
out further remark. This, it will be remembered, was 
before the law had been passed which imposes a 
penalty on a bystander for drawing attention to an 
oversight in scoring. 

I beheve Clay eventually lost the long odds, and 
had to pay them, as bets go with the stakes ; but 
cannot charge my memory positively as to the result 
of the rubber. 



Entering a Club card-room one afternoon I saw a 

card under D 's chair. I said Oh ! you've " 

intended to add ^' dropped a card," but, remember- 
ing I had no business to speak, stopped myself. 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



191 



D, — What were you going to say ? 
Ego. — Oh, nothing I I've no right to say any- 
thing. 

D. (rather a nervous old gentleman, plaintively). — 
Oh 1 do tell me if I've done anything wrong I I 
wouldn't do anything wrong for the world I — (and so 
on for several minutes). At last, 

Ego. — I'll say what I was going to say if the ad- 
versaries will give me permission. 

Adversaries. — Oh I Certainly, certainly, we don't 
want to take any advantage of a mistake (&c., fee.) 

Ego {to D ). — Well, then, you've dropped a 

card. 

D. (looking under his chair, picks up the card and 
puts it in his hand). — Thank you, I'm so much 
obliged to you. 

Grame proceeds. 

D. — Well, that's game, four by honors and several 
by cards (throws down his hand). 

Adversary. — Hallo ! You've got a card too many. 

(The dropped card, which D had put in his 

hand, was then discovered to belong to the other 
pack). Fresh deal. 

D. — Jones told me it was mine. 

Adversary, — We've nothing to do with what Jones 
told you. You should have counted your cards. 

D.— Jones ! Look here ! What is the rule ? 

But I had left. Foreseeing what was about to 
happen I had been suddenly seized with a burning 
desire to ascertain whether there was anyone in 
the billiard-room. How it ended I don't know, 
except that a bystander told me afterwards, I was 
weU abused all round. 



192 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



Moral : — Never, as an outsider, make any remark 
on the game, unless appealed to. 



Club Committees occasionally act in a very despotic 
manner; forgetting that they are only appointed to 
manage the alfairs of the members. Any serious 
misconduct ought not to be dealt with by a Com- 
mittee but by a special general meeting. 

At a London club, where no game is allowed on 
Sundays, it used to be the practice to play after 
twelve on Saturday night. On one occasion, how- 
ever, the fact that play had continued after twelve on 
Saturday night was brought officially to the notice 
of the Committee (who before that were perfectly 
cognizant of the practice), and the attention of the 
members engaged was called to the rule about 
Sunday play. The Committee wrote to the 

offenders (?) informing them that under Rule 

a repetition of their crime would entail their sum- 
mary expulsion. 

Certain fines are also exacted for late play, and 
these fines were duly paid, and this fact was within 
the knowledge of the Committee. 

I dont offer any opinion as to whether or not it is 
wicked to finish a rubber of Whist on Saturday night 
if the clock strikes twelve in the middle of it ; but it 
is rather amusing to think that the club in question 
pocketed the fines, thus rendering themselves par- 
takers of the crime, and that at the same time the 
Committee bullied the members who paid the fines. 
This proceeding, to quote Artemus Ward, betrays 
genius of a lorfty character." 



CARD-TAJBLK XALK. 



193 



Turning over the leaves of a blotting-book at a 
play-club I came across the following fragment of a 
letter, which I read almost before I was aware of it, 
or, as Mrs. Cluppins might have said, "the words 
forced themselves upon my eye " : — 

Sir, — When I had the pleasure of meeting you 
yesterday, as you did not refer to the racing and card 
account between us, I fancy it must haveshpped your 
memory that you owe me one hundred and eighty- 
seven pounds " 

Here the letter broke off. 

What a precious bad memory that fellow must 
have had ! 



I was once paid ten pounds twice over, owing to 
some mistake in card accounts. On trying to set it 
right the player who had overpaid admitted entire 
forgetfulness of the transaction, but was willing to 
take the ten pounds back if I was sure about it. I 
demurred to this, on the ground that the mistake 
might possibly hav^e been mine, but added that, as I 
did not feel justified in keeping the money, I would 
give it to any charity he liked to name. 

He said he did not care, so I proposed to present 
ten guineas to the Asylum for Idiots. 

My friend was a httle nettled at this, though really 
no reflection on his mental powers was intended. 
This channel was merely chosen because I thought 
the asylum a deserving institution. 



C B — — C , and old friend of mine, a Fellow 

of his college, and also a capital Whist-player, having 

13 



194 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



obtained an appointment, resigned his Fellowship, and 
left Cambridge to fulfil his new duties. 

C 's father, himself a scholar, but not a Uni- 
versity man, had a very easily-to-be-conceived notion 
that the Dons valued scarcely any branch of knowl- 
edge outside mathematics and classics. 

This gentleman happened to visit Cambridge 
shortly after his son's departure, and was entertained 
at the high table. He was naturally delighted at the 
compliments that were paid to his son's abihties, and 
at the regrets the Fellows expressed for his loss. 

Mr. C said the Master of the neighboring 

Hall, in a dignified manner, " your son's leaving us 
is considered quite a loss to the University." 

Mr. C pricked up his ears, expecting another 

tribute to his son's intellectual superiority. 

The Master continued, The fact is we have not 
had a good rubber since he left I " 

C — — B C being a high wrangler, one need 

not sympathize with his father at finding his son had 
not confined his studies solely to the curriculum im- 
posed by Alma Mater. 



The father of another friend of mine, under some- 
what similar circumstances, had more reason to 
grieve. 

Having at his son's request taken him away from 
his profession, and placed him at the University, at 
some effort to himself, trusting to find his reward in 
his son's scholastic success, I was able to congratu- 
late him one day on the voung fellow's having 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



195 



obtained a prize, the information having been im- 
parted to me by the father himself. But he roughly 
stopped my complimentary expressions as follows : — 
"Yes he has won a prize I " Then with a curl of 
the lip and a snort of chagrin, " The Silver Billiard 
Cue." 



The Laws of Whist, though very good in the 
principles on which they are based, are, it must be 
confessed, loosely worded. It is to be hoped that 
some day the drafting may be reconsidered. If this 
were done with the consent of the clubs that have 
adopted the laws (which one would think could be 
readily obtained), a boon would be conferred on 
Whist-players. 

I could give many instances of bad drafting, but, 
as this is not the place for criticism on the Laws of 
Whist, will quote only two forwarded by a humorous 

friend, S P , with the hope that the wording 

of our Whist code might be revised : — 

I have been considerably irritated of late by a 
Mr. Muff, a practical joker who, if he had only read 
the instructions of * Cavendish * as carefully as he 
reads the rules, might some day play one card out of 
three correctly. 

'Twas only the other day Mr. Muff was dealing, 
when his partner exclaimed, You have misdealt ! ' 
He replied, ' I am certain I have not,' and proceeded 
deliberately to count the cards remaining in his 
hand. I exclaimed, * Now you have made a misdeal 
of it 1 ' * No I have not,' he replied, ' fetch the rules.' 
And sure enough, he, not being under the impression 



196 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



that he had made a mistake (Law 44, par. v.) when 
he counted the cards, I could not claim a misdeal, 
but could only look severe and feel that I had been 
sold. 

I trusted that the dignined silence with which I 
accepted his reading of the rules would have made 
some impression upon him. Vain hope ! A few days 
afterwards he was again my opponent (the only 
piece of luck I had had that day), when his partner 
called attention to the trick of drav>dng his card 
towards him before I\Ir. Muff had played. I required 
the latter to play the highest of the suit. He played 
a small one, and presently one higher. * Well,' said 
I, ' I shall claim a revoke presenth^ if required.' 
' You may claim as much as you like,' said he, ' but 
you cannot enforce it.' ^ We shall see,' I rejoined. 
We won the game on the hand, and; as they were at 
love, there was no necessity to claim the penalty. 
But thinking that, for once, I knew the rules better 
that he, I called for the code and placed Rule 61 
before him, triumphantly. ' Can't you read? ' he 
said. * I am not ' a player who lias rendered himself 
liable ; ' it was my partner who rendered me liable 
to have my highest card called. You have no penalt\^ 
for my disobedience, save only that of not playing 
with me again. But x)lease, don't do that, for I have 
got one or tv/o more sells for you, and in time you'l. 
know the rules.' 

I was so vexed, I almost revoked next hand ; and 
have ever since prayed that Solomon or Lycurgus 
would arise and revise our Whist-laws." 



CAHD-TABLE TALK. 



197 



Law 33 always amuses me hugely. It informs us 
• that each player deals in his turn." This looks 
like a bit of any humor, especially as the law con- 
tinues, The right of dealing goes to the left," re- 
minding one of the rule of the road : — 

** If yon go to the left you are sure to go right, 
If you go to tlie right you go wrong." 

Law 84, limiting the power of consultation between 
partners, gives rise to numerous arguments and 
queries. After vainly endeavoring to make it clear 

to two friends, B and S , that they are at 

liberty to consult as to which of them shall exact the 
penalty, but that they must not consult as to which 

penalty it is advisable to exact, B said, I 

suppose I'm very dense, but for the life of me, I 
cannot understand it now.'* No more can I," 

echoed S , " the Laws of Whist seem to me to 

have been invented for the express purpose of puz- 
zling people." 

Some of the laws certainly might be made more 
clear ; and I quite agree with S P that re- 
vision at the jiands of a modern Solon or Lycurgus 
is desirable. 



Who has not experienced the truth of the proverb, 
Ridiculum acri ? " No doubt a httle playful banter 
will often carry a point, more surely, and apparently 
more convincingly, than the most carefully considered 
argument. A small instance of this occurs to me. 

While the laws of a certain game were under dis- 
cussion, I proposed a modification in one of the 
rules. 



19S 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



My suggestion was at first vehemently opposed. 
After exhausting time and temper, on what appeared • 
to me to be simply factious opposition, I gave up 
further argument, and closed my final reply in these 
terms: — 

**This appears to me to be common-sense, and 
therefore," — mark the therefore, — do not expect 
it will be adopted, common sense being, as Abernethy 
said, * a very uncommon thing.' " 

The alteration I contended for was eventually car- 
ried by a large majority. 



Certainties, like infinities, may be of different 
orders. For instance, there is the absolute certainty 
and the moral certainty. That parallel lines can 
never meet is an absolute certainty ; laying against 
dead'uns " is only a moral certainty. For dead'uns 
sometimes turn out to be real red-hot live'uns : wit- 
ness Hermit for the Derby. 

When I first joined the Whist Club, my rule 

was not to bet. But occasionally I was so pressed by 
a very indifferent player to give " him a bet, that I 
yielded. As far as play went it looked like a 
" moral." But I lost by it. 

I also laid the long odds sometimes. This is another 
** moral" in the long run; but for some months I 
lost by the odds. 

I won a majority of rubbers, but was out of pocket 
by these irregular bets. 

Meeting a friend at another club, he inquired, 
• How are you getting on at your new club ? " 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



199 



I puzzled him rather by replying *' I should have 
done very well if I had not been betting on cer- 
tainties." 

Another illustration of the uncertainty of certain- 
ties occurs to me in .the story of the Whist-player, 
who had a way of saying, by way of joke, that **he 
beheved in nothing but the Ace of Trumps." Even 
this rag of a belief was snatched from him in the fol- 
lowing cruel manner : — 

Playing Whist at the M Club, the skeptic won 

a treble and four, when his opponents called for new 
cards. The next hand the skeptic won six tricks, and 
still holding ace of trumps, placed it on the table, 
observing, There's the game and rubber." 

His right-hand adversary, however, produced 
another ace of trumps (the pack as occasionally 
happens with new cards, containing a duplicate), and 
consequently there had to be a fresh deal ; and the 
skeptic eventually lost the rubber. 



Travellers tell us that savages cannot count 
beyond ten. Long experience at Whist has con- 
vinced me that it is far more diffic ilt than is com- 
monly supposed for civilized people to count thirteen; 
for how often it happens that even good players 
excuse a mistake by saying they thought there was 
another trump in, or they had miscounted the 
spades, 



After I had played Whist a few times with H. H. 
the M , he said to me. '* I did not know 



200 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



until yesterday that I was a pupil of yours. I used 
to be a veiy bad player till I got your book." 

**I feel greatly flattered, M ," I replied, by 

yonr notice. I hope it has turned out a profitable 
investment." 

'*0h, no ! " he said, ''it has not. Since I studied 
the game I have lost thousands." 

The M was considerably above an average 

player and did not play high; so his ''thousands" 
must have been a humorous exaggeration. 



A lady friend of mine, residing in Buckinghamshire, 
was playing Whist at Latimer, and Lord Chesham 
(whose family name is Cavendish), was her partner. 
He played in some way quite contrary to rule, and 

Mrs. H , who was a book-player, said to him in 

the course of conversation, ''You should read the 
book 'Cavendish.'" 

Lord Chesham was very much astonished at being 
addressed, as he supposed, thus familiarly by a lady 
visitor ] and it had to be explained to him that Mrs. 

H was recommending a book on Whist for his 

perusal. 



Going into the card-room of a country club one 
day, I was invited to cut in, and it so happened that 

my partner, a Major S was the only player in 

the room to whom I was not personally known. The 
Major dealt, and just before he turned up he said to 
me, 

'* Do yon play the call for trumps ? " 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



201 



The shout of laughter with which the other players 
gi-eeted this question rather disconcerted my gallant 
partner. 

It should be added for the benefit of those who are 
not club-players, that this question was by no means 
unusual some years ago. 



Scene, hbrary in a private house. After dinner, 

Whist going on. Dramatis personce : Col. I (the 

host, a man of classical attainments); F N 

(a facetious man); X (an uneducated man, whom 

Col. I has picked up at the last minute to make 

a fourth) ; and H J . 

F, N» (having won the odd trick). — That's the dolits 
or trick. 

Coly I, — I never knew dolus meant the odd trick *' 
opens book-case and takes down Latin dictionary). 

Tutu, — Now, Colonel, table up. (The Colonel puts 

down the dictionary. H J , who has cut out, 

takes it up. At the end of the hand), 

H, J* — Here it is. Dolus ^ an artful contrivance, 
cunning device, trick. Doctus dolus, a clever trick." 

Fresh hand begins. X wins the odd trick by 

a desperate finesse. 

X. — There you are, Colonel I There's a doctor's 
bolus for you ! 



Scene, a Whist Club. Drainatis personcB: K 

D D (a most accomplished player) and 

H J partners ; Capt. P (an adversary of 

moderate capacity). 



202 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



's score is three. D and J- have made 

five tricks. D opens a fresh suit, spades, of which 

J holds ace, queen, and two small ones. J 

does not finesse the queen, but plays ace to save the 

game. The king of spades happens to be to J 's 

right. Eventually D — — and J lose the odd 

trick. 

J. (jokingly and ironically to his partner). — I lost 
the odd trick there, by bad play. 
D.— How ? 

J, — Not finessing the queen of spades. 

P. — Capital ! I like to see these Professors make 
mistakes. What made you do it ? 

e7. (with asperity). — It so happened that that trick 
saved the game ! (Collapse of P .) 

D. (coming to P 's rescue). — It did not save the 

game unless I had an honor. 

J, (with more asperity). — It so happened that you 
turned up the kDave I (Collapse of D .) 



I have stated that all the anecdotes in table-talk 
are true. I do not vouch for the one below, but give 
it as I heard it. 

A rubber was going on at the Portland. Five tricks 
had been played, of which H had won two, con- 
sequently eight cards remained in his hand. He put 
kis hand of cards on the table to take a pinch of 
snuff, and by mistake, took up the two tricks before 
him instead of his own cards. They happened to be 
two tricks in trumps containing all the honors. He 
trumped the next trick, played out the trumps, and 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



203 



necessarily won the game, and no one observed 
what had happened until it was pointed out by a 
bystander. 

This sounds very like a canard ; but an old mem- 
ber of the club assured me that it actually occurred. 



Scarcely a less extraordinary thing happened 
when Lord Lytton, Clay, my father, and another 
member, whose name I forget, were playing at the 
Portland. They were using two white packs, and a 
trick from one pack got mixed with the other, so 
that one pack contained forty-eight cards, the other 
fifty-six. The imperfect pack was dealt with, and 
after two or three tricks were played the hand was 
abandoned, and a treble scored. The redundant 
pack was then dealt with, but a misdeal was made. 
Had it not been so the duplicate cards must have 
been discovered. 

The third deal was a repitition of the first, and a 
bumper was won with forty-eight cards. 

The circumstance would never have been brought 
to light at all had not my father thought that some 
one was bottling " the ace of diamonds ; and when 
the cards were thrown down he examined them to 
ascertain who had it. He then discovered that there 
was no ace of diamonds in the. pack. He at once 
privately consulted a bystander as to the proper 
course to pursue — whether he ought to take the 
points or not. The bystander said that the adver- 
saries having abandoned the rubber, it was too late 
for them to plead that it had not been properly won. 



204 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



/ 



(See Law 59.) After the settlement my father told 
the players what had happened. The point as to the 
right of the winners to receive the points was referred, 
and was properly decided in accordance with the 
bystander's view already given. 

Perhaps a still more remarkable fact is that, after 
the rubber, ail the players said they thought they 
had counted their hands before playing. 



When my book on Whist was first published, the 
authorship was kept a profound secret, I sent a 
copy, ''with the author's compliments," to my father; 
and great was the amusement of my brother (who 
knew all about it) and myself at the governor's " 
guesses as to where it could have come from. 

One evening when about to play a family rubber 
for love, we proposed to the governor " to play one 
of the hands in the book, to see if the fellow knew 
anything about it." He consented. W^e sorted one 
of the hands (Hand No. XXXVI., p. 246, 12th Edition,) 
giving my father Y's hand, others of our circle taking 
the other hands, and my brother sitting out book in 
hand, to see whether we followed the ''book " play. 

The " governor" played the hand all right till he 
came to the coup at trick 9, when he went on with his 
established diamonds. 

Frater (interrupting). — The book says that is wrong. 

Pater, — Well, what does the book say ? 

Frater - — The book says you should lead a trump. 

Pater. — But there are no more trumps in I (Hesi- 
tates, and seeing that he has two trumps, and that 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



205 



leading one of them will not do any harm, leads 
it, and then turns round triumphantly and says), — 
NoAv what does the book say ? 

Frater (very quietly). — The book says you should 
lead another trump. 

This was too much. Lead a thirteenth trump 
whep you can give your partner a discard ! Oh, no I 
So the -* governor" would not and did not lead the 
trump, and he scored four. 

We then persuaded him to play the hand again, 
and to lead the thirteenth trump. To his surprise he 
scored five. 

He then admitted it was " very good," but could 
not think who in the world had sent him that book. 



Of course, I seldom played at the same table with 
my father at the Portland. But it occasionally hap- 
pened that there was only one table, and that we 
must either pla^^ together or lose our amusement. 

On one of these afternoons I was Z in Hand No. 
XXXVIII. (12th Edition, p. 258), and my father wasB. 
By reference to the book it will be seen that I played 
the grand coup against him. 

My partner was a very good player. When the 
hand was over the following conversation took 
place : — 

K, (my partner to me). — You trumped my best 
diamond. 

Mgo. — I know I did. We won the trick by it. 
K, — I don't see how you could win a trick by 
trumping a winning card ! 



206 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



I should mention that my father had seen the 
position as well as I had, that he knew I had three 
trumps (as was clear after my discard at Trick 8), 
and that he was waiting to be led to in trumps. I 
noticed, too, from his manner, that he hardly knew 
whether to feel pleased at my good play, or annoyed 
at being out-manoeuvred. 

Ego (to K). — Ask the governor if we didn't. 

Pater (gruffly). — Of course you did, of course you 
did. 

I afterwards told Clay of this gou^^ and he was 
good enough to say that he admired the discard of 
the king of spades at Trick 8. 

He also chalfed the governor" a bit about my 

unfilial conduct." 



According to my experience the opportunity for 
playing the grand coup occurs about once in a thou- 
sand rubbers ; to an individual player about once in 
four thousand rubbers. 

I can only remember to this date (January, 1879) 
to have played it eight times. 



The secret of my nom de plume, of course, oozed 
out by degrees. The process of oozing occasionally 
led to odd positions. 

One day my partner, Col. the Hon. P F , 

asked me point-blank, across the table, if I knew who 
the author was. Bushe, my adversary, who was in 
the secret, pointed out the author to my partner^ 
much to his astonishment. 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



207 



At dinner, at a friend's house, Mr. Q , a stranger 

to me, whom I afterwards dicovered to be a more 

than average player, remarked to our host, P , 

also a Whist-player, that he had had a curious hand 
at Whist from which he thought it doubtful which 
card should be led originally. The hand was as fol- 
lows :--Ace, king, queen of spades ; nine, eight, six, 
four, three of hearts ; eight of clubs ; and ace, kingy 
queen, three of diamonds (trumps). Score, love-all. 
P , being in the secret, turned to me and said, 

Jones, what is your opinion ? " 

I replied, I thought there was no sufficient reason 
for departing from the rule of leading the longest 
suit, and that I should start with a small heart. 

Q. — I don't think the lead can be decided off-hand 
in that way. However, I have written to Caven- 
dish " about it. 

P. (humorously). — I have already submitted it to 

Cavendish," and he said he should lead a small 
heart. 

Q. (surprised). — How on earth could you have done 
that 1 The case only occurred last night, and this Is 
the first time I have mentioned it to anyone* 

P. (always ready for a joke). — What I have told 
you is the fact. 

Q, (puzzled, and a little up in his stirrups). — I sup- 
pose I may believe the evidence of my own senses. 

P and I then looked at each other and laughed 

so heartily that Q said — 

There can be only one explanation of the matter. 

Mr. Jones, you must be " 

Quite so,'' said P 



208 



CARD-TABLE TAIiK. 



From a Whist point of view the hand just given is 
interesting, good judges differing as to which of three 
suits should be led originally. 

The cards it will be remembered were as follows : — 
Ace, king, queen of spades ; nine, eight, six, four, 
three of hearts ; eight of clubs ; and ace, king, queen, 
three of diamonds (trumps). 

The hand was shewn to a large number of players 
of repute. Some would lead one, some two, some 
three rounds of trumps ; and after leading trumps 
some would proceed with the spade suit, some with 
the heart suit. Others would not touch a trump at 
all, but would lead in the first instance either a spade 
or a heart. Others would lead a round of trumps, 
then a round of spades, then a heart. The majority 
were in favor of an original spade lead. 

I did not ask any players who are in the habit of 
opening the hand with a single card, or I could have 
got plenty of opinions in favor of a club lead. 

Petrie, a fine player of the old school, was in favor 
of a spade lead. He wrote me as follows : — 

If my i^artner can make a couple of tricks, I 
expect to win the game, as I can reasonably expect 
to make seven tricks myself. Establishing the hearts 
would, therefore, form no part of my scheme. I 
should lead spades, and if they yielded three rounds 
should go on with the hearts. I am opposed to a 
trump lead, preferring to lie quiet, when I am pretty 
sure to realize four tricks in the suit." 

Q- , the player to whom the hand was actually 

dealt, led a spade. His partner dropped the eight. 
Q then played a second round, to which his part- 
ner threw the knave. Q then led a third round, 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



309 



to see what his partner discarded. It turned out that 
the second hand had six spades originally, so the 
fourth hand made a small trump, and led a club. 
The command of the club suit lay with the present 

leader and his partner. Q was forced, and only 

made the odd trick, though his partner had a fine 
heart suit and four trumps. 

My objection to the spade lead is that its policy 
hes chiefly in the hope that spades may go round 
three times. If three rounds of spades are decided on, 
why not first extract three rounds of trumps ? Also, 
supposing the spades do go round three times, I am 
then driven to the heart suit, after having parted 
with the command of spades. And I fail to perceive 
that this postponement of the lead from the long suit 
in any way improves my partner's chance of making 
the two tricks I require from him. 

Clay's opinion, which is most interesting, was as 
under : — 

I am convinced that the right way to lead from 
this hand is either to begin with a heart, or to lead 
first one round of trumps. You play to win the 
game, which you can hardly do unless your partner 
has strength in hearts, or trumps the suit. I incline 
to the trump lead. I think one is bound to give one's 
partner some intimation of considerable strength. It 
is a risk. ISo doubt, the trump lead will take from 
him a trump, with which he might trump a heart ; 
but the risk ought to be run, in order to show your 
partner that you play to win the game, li you take 
a round of trumps, is it to be with the king or the 
queen ? I think the queen ; for if you play the king 
and stop, your partner looks for ace, knave, in your 

14 



no 



CARD-TAB1.E TAIiK. 



hand, and feels himself obliged to play a trump when 
he comes in. On the other hand, your queen may 
puzzle him ; yet he can hardly think that ace and 
king are held up against you. When you change 
your suit, if he is intelligent, he guesses how things 
are. *My partner,' he says, *is very strong in 
trumx>s, most probably had the tierce major ; but his 
suit is a long weak one, and he will not draw the 
trumps until he sees whether I can help him.' If he 
reasons thus, as he ought to do, he plays accordingly, 
— the trump if he has a good heart suit, — something 
else if he is weak in hearts, I have asked George 
Payne his opinion . I consider that he has the greatest 
genius for the game of any man I know. He would 
begin with the heart. He is an imperfect player 
from his long practice with muffs, and his habit of 
betting on races, &c., during the play of the hand. 
But he is a real genius, and there is no one like him 
to play with muffs, and guess, as it were by inspira- 
tion, all their absurdities." 

My objection to Clay's trump lead, with great 
deference, is that I could not pick out any good 
player who would not return the trump lead the 
moinent he got in. 

I lead the heart. My object is to estabhsh the 
heart, if my partner has strength in the suit, to force 
him if he has not. 

The only argument I can see against the heart lead 
is, that if one adversary is strong in hearts, and the 
other weak in hearts and short of spades, a double 
ruff' may be estabhshed. This I look on as an off- 
chance. 

I do not begin with a trump lest my partner should 



CARD-TABIiE TAIiK. 



211 



be numerically weak in hearts and trumps. I do not 
begin with the spade, because I want the spades as 
cards of re-entry. 

Suppose the same hand with the knave instead of 
the queen of spades. All doubt vanishes, the heart 
is then clearly, to my mind, the right lead. I cannot 
see that the substitution of the knave for the queen 
of spades so affects the hand as to alter its scheme. 



Apropos of the hand just discussed, I asked Clay's 
permission to publish his opinion in The Field, with 
his name attached. 

He replied as follows ; — 
My dear Jones, — I feel it a compliment that you 
make use of my letter, though I should have written 
it more carefully if I had anticipated print. 

Your objection to the trump lead is strong. It 
would have been decisive, if I fully agreed with your 
premises, but I don't think it wants ' an angel' to 
refrain from returning the trump lead. I think that 
most very good X3layers, say Petrie, Storey, Hermann, 
and many others, and, I am sure yourself, would not 
return the trump, unless strong in hearts. *The 
queen of trumps ' they would say, — rather a queer 
card, — can't possibly be a singleton, — almost sure to 
be the bottom of tierce major. Why doesn't he go 
on ? He wants to show me his strength in trumps, 
but has weak suits, — his hearts the best, — he wishes 
to see whether I can help him there, or anywhere 
else — and leaves me to decide whether it is well to 
draw the trumps. 

"This appears to me very simple, all the more sim- 



213 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



pie that it is the first card played, from which every 
one looks for some inkling as to the general scheme 
of the hand. I should most certainly reason thus, 
but you flatter me in saying that I alone should do 
so. You would, undoubtedly, unless you were play- 
ing carelessly, and so would mam- other players, less 
good, and less given to reflection than yourself. 

" Think of this ; the card, — itself unusual, — the 
changing suit, — all call for thought in the partner, 
and seem to say, — ' J^^ow think a bit. and mind what 

you are at= — don't play like , machinale' 

ment, 

" Quce cum ita sint, the queen of trumps if your 
partner is a very good player, — a heart if he is not. 
My mind is made up, and I won't unpack it. 

I don't say that in a similar difficulty, later in the 
hand, similar reflections would pass through my 
mind. They ought to do, — but one has generally 
taken up some idea, or scheme, which one does not 
readily abandon. The first card ! This ma>kes a 
great difference — does it not ? It comes on you just 
as you are putting things in order for the general 
scheme. You must think then, if ever. 

think you'll come round to my notion, though 
you mayn't confess it, — at least, not in print. 

Yours very truly, 

James Clay." 

It appears to me that we were as nearly agreed 
as possible ; but Clay assumed that, with certain 
partners, the trump lead would be safe to be under- 
stood, while I assumed that it would x^robably be 
misunderstood. 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



213 



I am still in doubt as to the best lead, but think 
that with * an angel 'for a partner one round of 
trumps, as a feeler, would be right. This was Her- 
mann's view, a man of deep Whist perception. 

With ninety-nine partners out of a hundred, or 
even nine hundred and ninety-nine out of a thousand, 
I think the heart would be the right lead. 

These arguments result in a very singular conclu- 
sion, viz., that the suit to be led originally, — the first 
card of the hand, — will sometimes depend on who is 
your partner. 



The question is often put to me, Why did you 
choose the nom de plume of ' Cavendish I ' " 

I can honestly say that on first rushing into print I 
had no idea any particular value attached to the 
copyright of a small book, or to an author's nom de 
plume. So I gave the matter of pseudonym but little 
thought, and stuck down on the title page the name 
of a club where I used to play small Whist. 

Assistance received from Clay has already been ac- 
knowledged ; and it may be added that almost every 
book bearing my nom de plum^e is more or less in- 
debted to several friendly helpers. 

In the case of Whist, the idea of publishing hands 
played completely through is not mine ; nor is the 
scheme mine of giving reasons and arguments for all 
the principles of play, instead of stating them, as was 
previously done, in the form of isolated and arbitrary 
conventions. I have only clothed with words, — and 
indeed not always that — the results of the discussions 

of E W , D J , W 

10 



214 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



D a , and C B G , ail 

valued friends, and members of the " little school 
that obtained notoriety in 1871, in consequence of an 
article on Whist which appeared in the Quarterly 
Review, in January of that year. 

The writer of that article said, — 
Between 1850 and 1860, a knot of young men at 
Cambridge, of considerable ability, who had at first 
taken up Whist for amusement, found it offer such a 
field for intellectual study, that they continued its 
practice more systematically, with a view to its com- 
plete scientific investigation. Since the adoption of 
Short-Whist, the constant practice' of adepts had led 
to the introduction of many improvements in detail, 
but nothing had been done to reduce the^ modern 
play into a systematic form, or to lay it clearly before 
the public. Its secrets, so far as they differed from the 
precepts of Hoyle and Matthews, were confined to 
small coteries of club-players. The ' little Whist- 
school held together afterwards in London, and 
added to its numbers ; and, in 1862, one of its mem- 
bers brought out the work published under the name 
of ' Cavendish.' " 

Now, to an article in the Quarterly there is no 
direct reply, as correspondence is not there permitted. 
It seems, however, that a writer in the Morning Post 
took umbrage at the above-quoted passage ; and in 
that paper he poured out the vials as follows : — 

' Cavendish,' who, in his modest preface, makes 
no profession of originality so far as rules or princi- 
ples are concerned, strange to say, does not so much 
as allude to the * little Whist-school,' to which he 
must have been so largely indebted. Stranger still, 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



215 



none of the most celebrated Whist-players appear to 
have been aware of the existence of this school, nor 
of any school that could possible have formed an 
epoch, in the last twenty years. * * * That Graham's 
the greatest of card-clubs, did nothing to reduce the 
modern play into a systematic form — leaving it to be 
perfected, not by the Portland, the next greatest of 
Whist-clubs, but by a knot of young men at Cam- 
bridge — is one of the most startling paradoxes I ever 
remember to have met. Shades of Granville, Sefton, 
De Ros, Deschapelles, Aubrey, George Anson, Henry 
Bentinck, .John Buslie, Charles Greville ! is it come 
to this ? Why, of the greatest living players there is 
hardly one who did not graduate in honors more 
than twenty years ago. And Whist is much in the 
same condition as art, literature, statesmanship, elo- 
quence, and fashion. Its brightest illustrations be- 
long to a preceding generation, or to one that is fast 
dying out. 

'Aiv Amateur." 

To this I replied in the Morning Post, as under : — 
*'Iask space to set your readers right with the 
'knot of .young men' who are rather unkindly dealt 
with by * An Amateur.' Your correspondent insinu- 
ates that this set of young men ignored Graham's 
and the Portland, and all former rules and principles, 
and went to work to elaborate a theory of their own, 
independently of all the most celebrated players, and 
that, in consequence, they compassed the complete 
development of the game of Whist, and brought it to 
its present scientific state. This is a most unfair way 
to view the discussions of half-a-dozen private gentle- 



216 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



men, who really did not know that they were doing 
anything but enjoying themselves over a half-crown 
rubber. Moreover, it [* An Amateur's ' letter] is a tra 
vestie of the story in the Quarterly. * * * The writer 
in the Quarterly does not assert that alolr, even the 
greater part, of the improvements in the game, since 
the time of Hoyle, were originated by a knot of young 
men at Cambridge. All he states is, that, through 
the agency of these young men, it happened that the 
game was first presented to the pubhc in a systematic 
form. The Quarterly Reviewer admits that the se- 
crets or principles of the modern game were known 
to coteries of club-players. All he contends for is 
ttiat they had never been published, or, to quote his 
own words, 'laid clearly before the public' * * * 
Your correspondent says that, in my preface, I make 
no allusion to the * little Whist-School,' to which I 
* must have been so largely indebted.' The reason is 
obvious. The gentlemen referred to b}- the Quarterly 
certainly did not consider themselves a ' school ' in 
the sense of being foundei^ of an epoch in the game. 
They merely met together and discussed, according 
to their lights, the" ideas of the best players to "whom 
they had access ; and I, as one of them, must plead 
guilty to having ultimately thrown out the results 
of such discussions in the form of a systematic 
Treatise." 

W D Gr- , one of the little school, also 

wrote to the same effect. He added two points of de- 
taii — viz., that the httle school consisted originally of 
five niembers ; that they began to study the game in 
1854 ; and that, as they could not find any treatise 
in existence from which the game could be learnt, 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



217 



they habitually referred points of difficulty to the 
leading players of the Portland Club, — notably to 
Mr. Clay, — though other members kindly gave their 
opinion from time to time. 

To these letters, " An Amateur" responded to the 
following effect : — 

It was far from his thoughts to hurt the feelings or 
deny the merits of the httle school. The tendency of 
his remarks was to show that they did nothing ex- 
traordinary, elaborated nothing, compassed nothing. 
They were doubtless as surprised to hear they had 
been creating a system or advancing a science, as M. 
Jourdain was to find he had spoken prose all his life 
without knowing it. But the morning after the ap- 
pearance of the Quarterly they awoke and, like By- 
ron after the j^ublication of Childe Harold," found 
themselves famoas. ''An Amateur " specially con- 
tests, with several arguments, the proposition assert- 
ing or assuming the marked influence of the school ; 
and, inasmuch as they regularly referred to the Port- 
land in their difificulties, the very utmost they could 
have done was to suggest the production of a syste- 
matic treatise to their Corypheus, who naturally con- 
sulted the highest authorities, oral and written. 

There was no further correspondence in the Post* 
But other papers took up the subject. A leader 
appeared in the Daily Telegraph, which is so cleverly 
and amusingly written that I make no excuse for 
quoting it in extenso : — 

Daily Telegraph," January 31, 1871. 

" In the midst of these wars, and rumors of wars, 
it is pleasant to find that in the world there is yet 



218 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



roord for hostilities of a less sanguinary kind. Whilst 
all are looking for the latest telegTams from Versailles, 
a fe^v can still busy themselves with letters, and re- 
plies to letters, in the great Whist-Controversy. The 
question seems to be this : To what degree of credit 
are the five ' Eriends in Council ' entitled, who, from 
the year 1854 or thereabouts, met in secret conclave, 
and meditated much on the problems presented by 
this attractive game ? The practical outcome of their 
deliberations is to be found in the little treatise on 
Whist which bears the honored name of * Cavendish.' 
We have all read that valuable book, but without 
being at all aware that we were treading on danger- 
ous ground. The article in the last number of the 
Quarterly Review seems to have originated the dis- 
pute in the columns of a fashionable contemporary — 
or, more properly speaking, the dispute has grown 
out of it. Did ' Cavendish ' and his four friends con- 
stitute a school ? Did they pretend to be a school at 
all ? Was there any learned Whist before their day ? 
or had such learning as existed merely fallen into 
desuetude in consequence of the changes in the theory 
and style of play ? In fact, what had been done be- 
fore the time of * Cavendish ' and his friends, ' to re- 
duce the modern play into a systematic form, or to 
lay it clearly before the public ' ? Many rash and 
misguided persons may be of the hasty opinion that 
here is the old story of a storm in a teapot. With 
what amount of laurel shall the head of the gallant 

'Major A 'be crowned? What has 'Coelebs' of 

the Portland done for the world in general and 
Whist-societies in particular ? Is * Cavendish ' a true 
man, or a mere buckram pretender, and his tojxx 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



219 



friends aiders and abettors in the sham ? We will 
say nothing about the venerable Hoyle, who might 
have deserved the respect of ' Sarah Battle' and 
ladies and gentlemen of her standing — but who, for 
us, is clearly out of date. But how about Mathews ? 
Time was when we used to hear Whist-adepts rave 
about Mathews. If Mathews were with you it signi- 
fied not if all the world were against you. We do not 
affect to speak with authority, but our surmise would 
be that real Whist- antiquaries would even in the 
present day recognize the merits of a writer who 
stood between the two systems. For modern use, and 
by modern usage, we should say that there are three 
treatises upon Whist which are habitually referred to 
and quoted by players. The first in date would be 

that of * Major A published originally in 1835. 

Then we have * Coelebs,' who hails from the Portland, 
and who dates from that sacred locality, in 1858. 
Finally, we have the«h*ttle treatise of ' Cavendish,' 
which seems to be of the year 1862. At any rate, one 
of the angry disputants, who does not appear to be 
partial to * Cavendish ' and his friends, asks in a high 
strain of moral indignation, ' Was there no treatise 
in existence from which the game could be learnt 
prior to 1862 ? ' Now, as this is a stone hurled into 
the little camp of the ' Cavendishes,' it does not seem 
to be a rash conjecture that the year named was the 
one in which they enlightened mankind, for the first 
time, on the subject of * Short-Whist.' At any rate, 
if we are wrong upon this important point, most per- 
sons will agree with us in thinking that it does not 
much matter. We make no mention of Mr. James 
Clay, the vi7' pietate grams of Short: Whist. Why 



220 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



should he be drawn into the dispute save for honor- 
able mention ? 

One can't help thinking of the old story of Uncle 
Toby and the Fly. There surely was room enough 
in the world for ]^dajor A * Cceiebs,' and ' Caven- 
dish.' Why should such clever fellows fall out, and 
upon the subject of a mere game ? So it is, however. 

Of * Major A ' in person — whether he be an actual 

warrior still on half-pay — or, as one may say, a gal- 
- lant ghost — we need say nothing ; but we should 
presume that the ' Major ' had been snatched away 
from his club long ago. Dr. Pole, however, wrote a 

preface to the treatise of ' Major A ' in 1864, and 

appears to have observed a contemptuous silence 
with regard to the efforts of the ' Cavendish ' clique 
or school. This was rather ill-natured, but is a mere 
trifle when compared with the general fierceness of 

'Amateur,' a devoted partizan of 'Major A 's,' 

who dates from the Athenaeurfi Club in the present 
year. * Amateur ' can only see through ' Major 

A 's ' spectacles, and hates the poor Cavendishites. 

as one may say, like poison. Surely it is a little 
spiteful to lug in the unfortunate and celebrated 
Tailors in Tooley-street because ' Cavendish ' and his 
friends were originally five in number — that is, writes 
* Amateur,' ' two more than the Tailors in Tooley- 
street.' 'Cavendish' might reply, in the same 
humorous way, that ' Amateur,' was two less than 
the Tailors in Tooley-street. Of course, it is not for 
us to say whether Dr. Pole meant mischief to ' Caven- 
dish' and his party when he wrote in 1870, — ' Never 
once alluding to ' Cavendi^^h ' and his school ' — as 
follows : ' Some of the later works published on 



CARD-TABIiE TAIjK. 



221 



Whist have been more explanatory than the early 
ones, but still they have consisted at best of merely 
practical rules without reference to their theoretical 
basis.' This, in the opinion of ' Amateur,' is a coup- 
de- grace to ' the little school and their Corypheus.' 

Well, then, as * Major A ,' or at least the Major's 

friends, appear to think so shghtly of other Whist- 
pundits, let us see in what estimation he and his work 
are held by competent men. Here is an expression of 
opinion from ^Coelebs ' ol the Portland. The public, 
we are very confident, will forgive the quotation — it 
reads so hke the utterance of one old G-erman Gram- 
marian against another who entertained perilous 
views on the subject of a second aorist. Listen to 

* Coelebs ' : The introduction of Short- Whist called 
forth in 1836 the work known under the nom de plume 

of * Major A .' With verbose augmentations, the 

author's instructions are nearly identical with those 
of Mathews, like whom he despises any approach to 
methodical arrangement, continually repeating simi- 
lar maxims, separating exceptions from rules, and ex- 
amples from both, jumbhng original data with deriv- 
ative results, presenting altogether such a labyrinth 
of advice and apparent inconsistency as no pupil 
can easily unravel. A * little learning ' is the sure 
result of such immethodical treatises not embracing 
any general outline before descending to minutiae. " 
So far, * Coelebs,' on * Major A ,' who is dear to 

* Amateur,' who again scorns * Cavendish' and his 
friends, and who suggests by impHcation that they 
are tailors. 

* ' Surely all this is a httle foolish, inasmuch as we 
have never even heard it suggested that the object of 



223 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



any of the parties Tras to hold himself out as the 
author and proprietor of the stock work upon Whist. 
Such a course would be intelligible enough on 
obvious grounds ; but here is rather a question of 
ranity than of profit. The strictures of * Amateur ' 
roused ' Cavendish ' from his rubber at the Portland. 
He writes a little on his own account, but a good 
deal on behalf of his friends. He exclaims against 
the propriety of bringing them before the public at 
all, inasmuch as they simply met to play their rubber 
for half-crown points, and never assumed the charac- 
ter of a school at all. True it is, as * Cavendish ' and 
they were jointly interested in the game, they used to 
discuss together any points which might arise, and 
endeavored to raise themselves to the level of modern 
practice. The result of their discussions was the 
treatise of ' Cavendish,' but they had arrived at their 
results by fair reasoning and by referring points of 
difficulty for the judgment of the leading players at 
the Portland Club. *' In this way they became ac- 
quainted with the latest developments of the game.' 
' Cavendish ' claims that the modern game was first 
presented to the public in a systematic form in con- 
sequence of these discussions and these references. 
He does not pretend to have invented what was new. 
The X3rinciples of the new game were well known to 
coteries of club-players : ■ Cavendish ' did his best to 
collect these, and to lay them before the public in a 
systematic form. This it is which puts * Amateur ' 
in such a towering passion, since it is his opinion 

that ' Major A as his work was developed, had 

done all that was necessary under this head. The 
publication of the article in the ' Quarterly,' which 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



228 



was favorable to the pretensions of ' Cavendish ' cum 
suiSt furnished the immediate occasion of this dispute. 
Ordinary people have derived occasional help from 
these treatises, though it is not often that the moder- 
ate player in real life sets himself down to consider 
on what principle he should avoid leading from ace, 
knave or ten. The thing is so, and there is good 
reason for it ; but the higher learning of the game 
has little interest for any but professional players — 
if the word may be used without offence. As the 
matter stands at present, the question seems to be, 

Was ' Major A ' or ' Cavendish ' first in the field 

with an exposition of the secrets of the new play 
which, until a certain date, were confined to the 
reverend bosoms of aged club-players? There are 
men living who should be able to decide this knotty 
point ; in the mean while, it is far from disagreeable 
to get back to the old quarrels in which ink, not 
blood, is shed. In such controversies as the one now 
raging between ' Amateur ' and * Cavendish ' there 
is no bitter end." 

The Daily News also had a leader, which though 
agreeable reading enough, adds nothing to the points 
of the controversy, and Bell's Life, Figaro, The 
Queen, and the Westminister Papers, each contri- 
buted their quantum of praise or blame, seriousness 
or chaff, according, I presume, to the frame of mind 
of the writers of the various articles. 

I will conclude this rather long effusion with The 
Field version of the discussion : — 



224 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



The Field," Feb. 4th, 1871 . 

A rather amusing pen-and-ink contest has arisen 
this week on the subject of Whist. The questions 
seem to be whether before the date of ' Cavendish ' 
the game of Wnist had ever been treated on a syste- 
matic basis, and whether the gentlemen whose dis- 
cussions were pubhshed by * Cavendish ' are entitled 
to the credit of having exerted any marked influence 
on the Whist of the present day. We are inchned to 
the view that the first question should be answered 
in the negative, and the second in the affirmative. 
Had the knot of young men referred to in the Quar- 
terly never met, there would have been no * Caven- 
dish,' and perhaps no Clay, no Pole, no article on 
Whist-pla^fers in Fraser nor in the Quarterly, no 
card department in The Field — in short, no modern 
scientific Whist published to the world. We direct 
our readers to a letter from * Cavendish ' in another 
column, which will enable them to judge as to the 
rights of this pretty little quarrel." 

I make no apology for quoting my own letter, 
which ran as follows : — 

*'To the Editor of The Field, 
Sir, — I trust I may be excused for entering on 
some personal matters in relation to Whist. You are 
of course aware that in the Quarterly Review for 
January appeared an article on modern Whist, con- 
taining a learned account of the history of the game, 
and concluding with a review of certain books. 

In the course of the historical essay the following 
passage occurs : — 

' Between 1850 and 1860 a knot of young men at 
Cambridge, of considerable abihty, who had at first 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



235 



taken up Whist for amusement, found it offer such a 
field for intellectual study, that they continued its 
practice more systematically, with a view to its com- 
plete scientific investigation. Since the general 
adoption of Short- Whist, the constant practice of 
adepts had led to the introduction of many improve- 
ments in detail, but nothing had been done to reduce 
the modern play into a systematic form, or to lay it 
clearly before the public. Its secrets, so far as they 
differed from the precepts of Hoyle and Mathews, 
were confined to small coteries of club-play-ers. The 
little Whist-school held together afterwards in Lon- 
don, and added to its numbers ; and, in 1862, one of 
its members brought out the work published under 
the name of * Cavendish.' 

*'This passage has been the subject of comment 
during the past week in several newspapers of high 
standing ; the points raised being, Did the * knot of 
young men' originate, or elaborate, or compass any- 
thing ? or did they draw their inspiration from other 
sources, and merely arrange what was well known 
and procurable before ? 

I think the knot of young men did originate 
something, and I believe that the result of their dis- 
cussions when put into book-form was more than a 
re-arrangement of previously existing matter. 

In order fairly to decide as to what was novel in 
their work, we must first notice what had been pre- 
viously done. Prior to the appearance of our trea- 
tise — I say * our,' for without the valuable assistance 
of members of the little school I alone should not 
have rushed into print — the treatises in vogue were 
those of Hoyle, Matthews, and * Coelebs.' 

15 



226 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



Of Hoyle it is impossible to speak but in terms of 
high praise, notwithstanding that his style was some- 
what obscure. His advice is mainly correct — won- 
derfully so if we consider that in his day the game 
was in its infancy. As an example, he pointed out 
that with king, queen, knave, and one small card 
the proper lead is the king ; but that with two small 
cards the proper lead is the knave. There was, how- 
ever, but little method in his treatment, and but 
little argument in his pages. He confined himself to 
stating cases, without entering into principles. I do 
not mean to say that he did not explain the reason 
for the difference in the two leads given as an ex- 
ample. He did so; but he stopped there. He did 
not generalize. The generalization of the above rule 
would be, that if you lead from a sequence, and de- 
sire your partner to win the card led, you should 
lead the lowest of the sequence; but that if you 
desire him to pass the trick, you should lead the 
highest. Nothing of this kind will be found in 
Hoyle. 

" Matthews or Mathews (for the name is spelt differ- 
ently in different editions) carried out a plan similar 
to that of Hoyle. He stated many cases of great 
interest, and cases containing much instruction. As 
an example I may quote from memory the follow- 
ing : — ' Q. Having ace, knave, ten, and a small card, 
second hand, a small card being led, what should 
you play ? A. In plain suits the small card ; in 
trumps the ten. The reason is that a small card is 
never led from king, queen, in plain suits ; conse- 
quently one of those cards must be in the third or 
fourth hands, and the ten would be played to no 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



22t 



purpose. But in trumps, king and queen may both 
be in the leader's hand.' Matthews, like Hoyle, has 
no system, and he never refers to general principles. 
In fact, he only professes to give a selection of cases. 

*''0f 'Major A ' I say nothing. * Major A ' 

is merely Matthews done in Short- Whist, Vv^ith irrel- 
elant additions. Thus, when Matthews says * nine 
all,' * Major A ' says 'four ail,' and when Mat- 
thews says * with queen, knave, put on your knave,' 

' Major A ' says ' do not put on your queen ; ' and 

so on through the whole book. 

Coelebs also gives cases and instructions, but there 
he stops ; he never rises to principles. He was, how- 
ever, well aware of the want of method in previous 
treatises. He arranges the subject judiciously, his 
defect being that he omits to trace the cases to their 
true source. 

'* Now, without for one moment underrating the 
services rendered to Whist by the authors referred to, 
I assert that the great fault in the manner of teach- 
ing which runs through them all is, that the rules of 
play are laid down by these writers in the form of 
isolated and arbitrary cases, and the general prin- 
ciples v/hich overlie all these cases are never fully 
stated, though they are occasionally hinted at ; and 
hence the acquisition of knowledge from those books 
depends rather on effort of memory than on occupa- 
tion of the understanding. E-ules alone, however 
correct, if not thoroughly comprehended, are often 
mischevious, as circumstances may require them to 
be departed from. In such position the player by 
mere rote is all at sea ; but the one who knows well 
the process of the derivation of the rules on which he 



228 



CABD-TABLE TALK. 



acts has little difficulty in meeting and dealing with 
exceptional cases. 

What I claim, then, by way of originality for tho 
book of * the httle school ' is that, so far as in us lay, 
the reasoning on which the principles of play are 
based is given logically and completely. In this I 
believe that ' Cavendish ' di:ffers materially from all 
prior treatises ; and if this be admitted it follows that 
the knot of young men did originate, did elaborate, 
did compass something. 

' ' As far as details are concerned, I fancy * the little 
school ' also did something ; but this is a minor mat- 
ter, and it is not denied that from time to time fresh ' 
details have sprung into life, and that some of them 
are considered improvements. Therefore, I will not 
enter into details. 

But before closing this letter, I should like to put 
on record (since the subject is before the public) how 
it happened that a knot of young men, who merely 
met to enjoy and discuss a rubber, ever went into 
print at all. 

* ' When we used to meet in London, notes were 
occasionally made of points which interested us, and 
some experiments were tried, such as matching two 
bad players against two good ones, an account of 
which has already appeared in The Field, On other 
occasions, and for a long time, every hand was played 
out to the end, and the result put down on paper, in 
order to enable us to calculate the odds at different 
points of the game. The results of this experiment 
have also appeared in The Field, During these 
experimental rubbers we accumulated a lot of MSS. 
As far as I remember, we had some hazy and un- 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



229 



defined idea of publishing some day; but no one 
seemed to care about writing a book, and the papers 
were thrown into a drawer, and remained there, half- 
forgotten for several years. 

It so happened, however, that in December, 1861, 
there appeared in Macmillan's Magazine an article 
on cards, recommending and describing Piquet and 
Bezique ; the latter was then scarcely played in this 
country. In a foot-note the writer expressed an 
opinion that some games at Whist might be advan- 
tageously published, on the same plan as that fol- 
lowed with games of chess. I happened to read the 
article, and I wrote to the author of the paper, offer- 
ing to lend him the MS. notes of the little school. 
This offer he accepted ; but I found, on rummaging 
them out, we had taken so much for granted in our 
memoranda that it was necessary, in order to make 
anyone else understand them, to re- write and to add 
copious notes. Presently I found that I had to repeat 
the same note ; so, in order to save the trouble of 
re- writing all the reasons for, say, causing A to lead 
from his strongest suit, I erected this into a principle, 
argued it out, and afterwards referred to principle 1. 
This was the skeleton of the book ; and, on being 
urged to pubhsh, I obtained the co-operation of the 
members of the ' httle school,' and, aided by their 
remarks and suggestions, appeared as an author. 
And, having talked a good deal about myself, I 
would add that, whatever originality there may be 
in our ' labor of love,' the credit is mainly due to my 
friends, towards whom I stand only in the relation 
of a mouthpiece. 

The Author of ' Caveotish on Whist.* 



830 



OARD-TABIiE TALK. 



The experiment just referred to, viz., the matching 
two good players against two bad ones, was under- 
taken in order to ascertain approximately the ad- 
vantage of skill. It arose and was conducted as 
follows : — 

In the latter part of the winter of 1857. during an 
after-dinner conversation, it was remarked by some 
of the party that Whist is a mere matter of chance, 
since no amount of ingenuity can make a king win 
an ace, and so on. This produced an argument as to 
the merits of the game ; and as two of the disputants 
obstinately maintained the original position, it was 
proposed to test their powers by matching them 
against two excellent players in the room. To this 
match, strange to say, the bad players agreed, and a 
date was fixed. Before the day arrived, it was pro- 
posed to play the match in double, another rubber of 
two good against two bad players being formed in an 
adjoining room, and the hands being played over 
again, the good players having the cards previously 
held by the bad ones, and vice versa, the order of 
the play being, of course, in every other respect pre- 
served. The difficulty now was to find two players 
sufficiently bad for the purpose ; but two men were 
found, on condition of having odds laid them at 
starting, which was accordingly done. 

On the ap]:.ointed day, a table was formed in room 
A, and as soon as the first hand was played, the cards 
were re-sorted and conveyed into room B. There the 
hand was played over again, the good players in 
room B having the cards that the bad players had in 
room A. At the end of the hand, the result was 
noted for comparison, independently of the score. 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



231 



whicn was conducted in the usual way. Thirty-three 
hands were played in each room. In room A, the 
good players held very good cards, and won four rub- 
bers out of six ; in points, a balance of eighteen. In 
room B, the good players had, of course, the bad 
cards. They played seven rubbers with the "same 
number of hands that in the other room had played 
six, and they won three out of the seven, losing seven 
points on the balance. The difference, therefore, was 
eleven points, or nearly one point a rubber in favor 
of skill. 

A comparison of tricks only showed some curious 
results. In seven of the hands the score by cards in 
each room was the same. In eighteen hands the 
balance of the score by cards was in favor of the 
superior players ; in eight hands in favor of the 
inferior. In one of these hands the bad players won 
two by cards at one table, and three by cards at the 
other. 

The most important result is, that at both tables 
the superior players gained a majority of tricks. In 
room A, they won on the balance nineteen by tricks ; 
in room B, they won two by tricks. 

It will be observed that this experiment does not 
altogether eliminate luck, as bad play sometimes suc- 
ceeds. But by far the greater part of luck, viz., that 
due to the superiority of winning cards, is, by the 
plan described, quite got rid of. 

Dr. Pole (The Field, June 16, 1866,) arrives at a 
result nearly the same by a statistical method. He 
writes to this effect : — 

It is very desirable to ascertain the value of skill 
at Whist. 



232 



CARD-TABLE TALK. 



*'The voluntary power we have over results at 
Whist is compounded of — 1. The system of play ; 2. 
the personal skill employed." 

The modern system, which combines the hands of 
the two partners, as against no system (the personal 
skill of all being pretty equal), is worth — Dr. Pole 
thinks — about half-a-point a rubber, or rather more. 
About nine hundred rubbers played by systematic as 
against old-fashioned players, gave a balance of 
nearly five hundred points in favor of system. 

The personal skill will vary with each individual, 
and is difficult to estimate ; but looking at pubhshed 
statistics, in which Dr. Pole had confidence, he puts 
the advantage of a very superior player (all using 
system), at about a quarter of a point a rubber. 
Consequently, the advantage due to combined per- 
sonal sldll (t.e., two very skilful against two very un- 
skilful players, all using system), would be more than 
half a point a rubber. 

The conclusion arrived at by Dr. Pole is that the 
total advantage of both elements of power over 
results at Whist, may, under very favorable circum- 
stances, be expected to amount to as much as one 
point per rubber." 

Now, at* play-clubs, nearly all the players adhere 
more or less closely to system, and the great majority 
have considerable personal skill. Consequently, only 
the very skilful player can expect to win anything, 
and he will only have the best player at the table for 
a partner on an average once in three times. It 
follows from this, that the expectation of a very 
skilful player at a play-club will only average, at 
the most, say a fifth or a sixth of a point a rubber. 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



233 



January, 1879. — In Mortimer Collins' **Life," pub- 
lished not long since, it is stated that I told him I 
had played 20,000 rubbers in ten years, and that I 
had won £2,000. 

I will not enter into the question of the propriety 
of publishing gossip of this kind, and of giving names 
without permission. I am not ashamed of having 
played on an average half-a-dozen rubbers a day, 
nor of having won. But, had I been asked, I should 
certainly have refused permission to make my pri- 
vate affairs public. Many goody-goody people 
might think me very horrid," to waste so much 
time at the card-table, and to play for so much 
money. 

The statement published by Mortimer Collins' 
widow is mere talk, and is devoid of all scientific 
interest. The amount of money won or lost is not 
any criterion of the result, unless the amount of the 
point is given, and the stakes are never changed. 
What is interesting is, to know what per-centage of 
advantage or disadvantage att ches to the individual 
in consequence of his personal skill, or the want of 
it. The way to arrive at this is to keep an aqpount 
of a long series of rubbers ; the longer the series, 
the more closely the result will approximate to the 
truth. Even when arrived at, the answer will only 
be true for the individual, as against the set with 
whom he is the habit of contending. Deschapelles 
estimated his advantage at Long- Whist at a quarter 
of a point a rubber. My averages, at Short- Whist, 
are not nearly so good as this. But then Des- 
chapelles ^Sb^ facile princeps, and Long- Whist gives 
greater scope for play than Short. Again, I am in 



234 



CARD-TABIiE TALK. 



the habit of avoiding tables where the players are 
not pretty good. This must, of course, affect the 
averages. 

My averages are as under. I should premise that 
the rubbers to which the account refers were all 
played at clubs where good play was the rule. 
Whatever the results may be worth, I give them — 
from January, 1860, to December, 1878 : — 

Played in all . . . 30,668 rubbers. 

Won 15,648 

Lost 15,020 



Won . . 628 rubbers. 

Or, on the average, won one rubber in forty-nine, a 
trifle over two per cent. 

The points give the following averages : — 

Won in all . . • . 85,486 points. 
Lost 81,055 



Won . . 4,431 points. 

Or, on the average, as nearly as possible, one-seventh 
of a point a rubber, 

The average value of a rubber is rather more than 
five points and two-fifths (5.43). The average value 
of rubbei-s won is 5.46 points ; of rubbers lost, is 5.40, 
giving a difference of six-hundredths (or about one- 
seventeenth) of a point per rubber in favor of 
winning rubbers over losing ones. 



CARD-TABLE TAIiK. 



235 



January, 1879. — During the last sixteen years I 
have answered in writing nearly 10,000 questions on 
the laws of games, chiefly Whist. But other games 
are often the subject of queries. My interrogators 
seem to think I ought to know the rules of all games, 
from pitch-and-toss to manslaughter. With a little 
trouble I generally manage to find some one who can 
inform me who is the best authority on bumble- 
puppy, or some other outlandish game, when I in 
turn become an interrogator. 

Some of the questions are very droll. The follow- 
ing, from a lady in the country, a total stranger, 
came to hand about Christmas, 1877 : — May tee- 
totallers join in a game of snap-dragon ? " 



THE Ein>. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



BY PERMISSIOiS', VERBATIM! FROM THE CLUB 
CODE. 

THE FOOT NOTES ARE ADDED BY THE AUTHOR, 



THE RTTBBEH. 

1. The rubber is the best of three games. If the 
first two games be won by the same players, the third 
game is not played. 

SCORTNG. 

2. A game consists of five points. Each trick, 
above six, counts one point. 

3. Honors, ^.e., Ace, King, Queen, and Knave of 
trumps, are thus reckoned ; 

If a player and his partner, either separately or 
conjointly, hold — 

I. The four honors, they score four points. 
11. Any three honors, they score two poiats. 
ni. Only two honors, they do not score. 

4. Those players, who, at the commencement of a » 
deal, are at the score of four, cannot score honors. 



238 



THE iAWS OF WHIST. 



5. The penalty for a revoke* takes precedence 
of all other scores. Tricks score next. Honors 
last. 

6. Honors, unless claimed before the trump card 
of the following deal is turned up, cannot be scored. 

7. To score honors is not sufficient; they must 
be called at the end of the hand ; if so called, they 
may be scored at any time during the game. 

8. The winners gain — 

I. A treble, or game of three points, when their ad- 
versaries have not scored. 

n. A double, or game of two points, when their ad- 
versaries have scored less than three. 

in. A single, or game of one point, when their ad 
versaries have scored three, or four. 

9. The winners of the rubber gain two points (com- 
monly called the rubber points), in addition to the 
value of their games. 

10. Should the rubber have consisted of three 
games, the value of the losers' game is deducted from 
the gross number of points gained by their oppo- 
nents. 

11. If an erroneous score be proved, such mistake 
can be corrected prior to the conclusion of the game 
in which it occurred, and such game is not concluded 
t^ntil the trump card of the following deal has been 
Turned up. 

12. If an erroneous score, affecting the amount of 
the rubber, t be proved, such mistake can be rectified 
at any time during the rubber. 

* Vide Law 72. 

t e.g. If a single is scored by mistake for a double or treble, or 
vice versd. 



THE LAWS OF WHlST. 



2B3 



CUTTING. 

13. The ace is fhe lowest card. 

14. In all cases, every one must cut from the sam.e 
pack. 

15. Should a player expose more than one card, he 
must cut again. 

FORMATION OF TABIiE. 

16. If there are more than four candidates, the 
players are selected by cutting : those first in the 
room having the preference. The four who cut the 
lowest cards play first, and again cut to decide on 
partners ; the two lowest play against the two high- 
est ; the lowest is the dealer, who has choice of cards 
and seats, and, having once made his selection, must 
abide by it. 

17. When there are more than six candidates, 
those who cut the two next lowest cards belong to 
the table, which is complete with six players ; on the 
retirement of one of those six players, the candidate 
who cut the next lowest card has a prior right to 
aaiy after comer to enter the table. 

CnjTTTNG CARDS OF EQUAli VALITB. 

18. Two players cutting cards of equal value,* un- 
less such cards are the two highest, cut again; 

* In cuting for partners. 



240 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



should they be the two lowest, a fresh cut is neces- 
sary to decide which of those two deals.* 

19. Three players cutting cards of equal value cut 
again ; should the fourth (or remaining) card be the 
highest, the two lowest of the new cut are partners, 
the lower of those two the dealer ; should the fourth 
card be the lowest, the two highest are partners, the 
original lowest the dealer, f 

CUTTING- OUT. 

20. At the end of a rubber, siiould admission be 
claimed by any one, or by two candidates, he who 
has, or they who have, played a greater number of 
consecutive rubbers than the others is, or are, out ; 
but when all have played the same number, they 
must cut to decide upon the out-goers ; the highest 
are out. 

* Example' A three, two sixes, and a knave are cut. The two 
sixes cut again, and the lowest plays with the three. Suppose at the 
second cut, the two sixes cut a king and a queen, the queen plays 
with the three. 

If at the second cut a lower card than the three is cut, the three 
still retains its privileges as original low, and has the deal and choice 
of cards and seats. 

^Example. Three aces and a two are cut. The three aces cut 
again. The two is the original high, and plays with the highest of 
the next cut. 

Suppose at the second cut, two more twos and a king are drawn. 
The king plays with the original two, and the other pair of twos cut 
again for deal, 

Suppose instead, the second cut to consist of an ace and two 
knaves. The two knaves cut again, and the highest plays with the 
two 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



24] 



ENTRY AND RB-ENTRIT. 

21. A candidate wishing to enter a table must de- 
clare such intention prior to any of the players hav- 
ing cut a card, either for the purpose of commencing 
a fresh rubber, or of cutting out. 

22. In the formation of fresh tables, those candi- 
dates who have neither belonged to nor played at 
any other table have the prior right of entry ; the 
others decide their right of admission by cutting. 

23. Any one quitting a table prior to the conclusion 
of a rubber, may, with consent of the other three 
players, appoint a substitute in his absence during 
that rubber. 

24. A player cutting into one table, whilst belong 
ing to another, loses his right * of re-entry into that 
latter, and takes his chance of cutting in, as if he 
were a fresh candidate. f 

25. If any one break up a table, the remaining 
players have the prior right to him of entry into any 
other, and' should there not be sufficient vacancies 
at such other table to admit all those candidates, 
they settle their precedence by cutting. 

BHUFFIiING. 

26. The pack must neither be shuffled below the 
table nor so that the face of any card be seen. 

27. The pack must not be shuffled during the play 
of the hand. 

* i.e. his prior right. 

t And ]ast in the room (vide Law 10). 



242 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



28. A pack, haying been played with, must neither 
be shuffled, by deahng it into packets, nor across thp 
table. 

29. Each player has a right to shuffle, once only, 
except as proyided by Rule 32, prior to a deal, after 
a false cut,* or when a new dealf has occurred. 

30. The dealer's partner must collect the cards 
for the ensuing deal, and has the fii^t right to shuffle 
that pack. 

31. Each player, after shuffling, must place the 
cards, properly collected and face downwards, to the 
left of the player about to deal. 

32. The dealer has always the right to shuffle last ] 
but should a card or cards be seen during his shuf- 
fling or whilst giying the pack to be cut, he may be 
compelled to re-shuffle. 

THE DEAli. 

33. Each player deals in his turn; the right of 
deahng goes to the left. 

34. The player on the dealer's right cuts the pack, 
and in diyiding it, must not leaye fewer than four 
cards in either packet ; if in cutting, or in replacing 
one of the two packets on the other, a card be ex- 
posed, X or if there be any confusion of the cards, or a 
doubt as to the exact place in which the pack was 
diyided, there musf be a fresh cut. 

35. When a player, whose duty it is to cut, has 

* Vide Law 34. ^ Vide Law 37. 

% Aftftr the two packets have been re-umted, "Law 38 .^omee into 
operation. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



243 



once separated the pack, he cannot alter his inten- 
tion ; he can neither re-shuffle nor re-cut the cards. 

36. When the pack is cut, should the dealer shu fflp 
the cards, he loses his deal. 

A NSW DEAL. 

37. There must be a new deal * — 

I. If, during a deal, or diirmg the play of a hand, the 
pack be proved iacorrect or imperfect. 

n. If any card, excepting the last, be faced in the 
pack. 

38. If, whilst dealing, a card be exposed by the 
dealer or his partner, should neither of the adver- 
saries have touched the cards, the latter can claim a 
new deal ; a card exposed by either adversary gives 
that claim to the dealer, provided that his partner 
has not touched a card ; if a new deal does not take 
place, the exposed card cannot be called. 

39. If, during dealing, a player touch any of his 
cards, the adversaries may do the same, without los- 
ing their privilege of claiming a new deal, should 
chance give them such option. 

40. If, in dealing, one of the last cards be exposed, 
and the dealer turn up the trump before there is rea- 
sonable time for his adversaries to decide as to a fresh 
deal, they do not thereby lose their privilege. 

41. If a player, whilst deahng, look at the trump 
card, his adversaries have a right to see it, and may 
exact a new deal. 

42. If a player take into the hand dealt to him a 
card belonging to the other pack, the adversaries, on 

* i. g., the same dealer must deal again. Vide also Laws 47 and 50, 



244 



THE jjAyrs OF ymisT, 



discovery of the error, may decide whether they will 
have a fresh deal or not. 

A MISDEAL, 

48. A misdeal loses the deal.* 
44. It is a misdeal f — 

I. Unless the cards are dealt into four packets, one 

at a time in regular rotation, beginning with the 

player to the dealer's left. 
U. Should the dealer place the last {i.e., the trump) 

card, face downwards, on his own, or any other 

pack. 

III. Should the trump card not come in its regular 
order to "the dealer ; but he does not lose his 
deal if the pack be proved imperfect. 
V. Should a player have fourteen t cards, and either 

of the other three less than thirteen. § 
V. Should the dealer, under an impression that he 
has made a mistake, either count the cards on 
the table, or the remainder of the pack. 

VT. Should the dealer deal two cards at once, or two 
cards to the same hand, and then deal a third ; 
but if, prior to dealing that third card, the 
dealer can, by altering the position of one card 
only, rectify such error, he may do so, except 
as provided by the second paragraph of this 
Law. 

VII. Should the dealer omit to have the pack cut to 
him, and the adversaries discover the error, 
prior to the trump card being turned up, and 
before looking at their cards, but not after hav- 
ing done so. 

♦ Except as provided iaXaws 45 and 50. t Vide also Law 36. 
t Or more. § The pack being perfect. Vide Law 47. 



THE LA^VS OF WHIST. 



245 



45. A misdeal does not lose the deal if, during the 
dealing, either of the adversaries touch the cards 
prior to the dealer's partner having done so, but 
should the latter have first interfered with the cards, 
notwithstanding either or both of the adversaries 
have subsequently done the same, the deal is lost. 

46. Should three players have their right number 
of cards — the fourth have less than thirteen, and not 
discover such deficiency until he has played any of 
his cards,* the deal stands good ; should he have 
played, he is as answerable for any revoke he may 
have made as if the missing card, or cards, had been 
in his hand i he may search the other pack for it, 
or them, 

47. If a pack, during or after a rubber, be proved 
incorrect or imperfect, such proof does not alter any 
past score, game, or rubber ; that hand in which the 
imperfection was detected is null and void ; the 
dealer deals again. 

48. Any one dealing out of turn, or with the ad- 
versary's cards, may be stopped before the trump 
card is turned up, after which the game must pro- 
ceed as if no mistake had been made. 

49. A player can neither shuffle, cut, nor deal for 
liis partner, without the permission of his opponents. 

50. If the adversaries interrupt a dealer whilst 
(fealing, either by questioning the score or asserting 
that it is not his deal, and fail to establish such claim, 
should a misdeal occur, he may deal again. 

51. Should a player take his partner's deaL and 

* i. e.j until after he has played to the first trick. 

♦ Vide also Law 70, and Law 44, paragraph It. 



246 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



misdeal, the latter is liable to the usual penalty, 
and the adversary next in rotation to the player who 
ought to have dealt then deals. 

THE TRHMP CARD. 

52. The dealer, when it is his turn to play to the 
first trick, should take the trump card into his hand ; 
if left on the table after the first trick be turned and 
quitted, it is liable to be called ; * his partner may 
at any time remind him of the liability. 

53. After the dealer has taken the trump card into 
his hand, it cannot be asked for ; f a player naming 
it at any time during the play of that hand is liable 
t/O have his highest or lowest trump called, t 

54. If the dealer take the trump card into his hand 
before it is his turn to play, he may be desired to lay 
it on the table ; should he show a wrong card, this 
card may be called, as also a second, a third, &c., 
until the trump card can be produced. 

55. If the dealer declare himself unable to recollect 
the trump card, his highest or lowest trump may be 
called at any time during that hand, and, unless it 
cause him to revoke, must be played ; the call may 
l^e repeated, but not changed, i. e., from highest to 
lowest, or vice versa, until such card is played. 

* It is not usnal to call the trump card if left on the table, 
t Any one may inquire what the trump suit is, at any tino-e, 
t In the manner described in Law. 



TEra LAWS OF WHIST. 



247 



CARDS T.TA-RT.Tl TO BE CALLED. 

56. An exposed cards are liable to be called, and 
must be left * on the table ; but a card is not an ex- 
posed card when dropped on the floor, or elsewhere 
below the table. 

The following are exposed f cards : — 

I. Two or more cards played at once.| 
n. Any card dropped with its face upwards, or in any 
way exposed on or above the table, even though 
snatched up so quickly that no one can name it. 

57. If any one play to an imperfect trick the best 
card on the table, § or lead one which is a winning 
card as against his adversaries, and then lead again, || 
or play several such winning cards, one after the 
other, without waiting for his partner to play, the 
latter may be called on to win, if he can, the first or 
any other of those tricks, and the other cards thus 
improperly played are exposed cards. 

58. If a player, or players, under the impression 
that the game is lost — or won — or for other reasons — 
throw liis or their cards on the table face upwards, 
such cards are exposed, and liable to be called, each 
player's by the adversary ; but should one player 
alone retain his hand, he cannot be forced to aban- 
don it. 

* Face upwards. 

* Detached cards (i.e., cards taken out of the hand but not dropped' 
are not liable to be called unless named ; vide Law 60. It is imper 
tant to distinguish between exposed and detached cards. 

* If two or more cards are played at once, the adversaries have r 
right to call which they please to the trick in course of play, and a: 
terwards to call the others. 

§ And then lead without waiting for his partner to play. 
U Without waiting for his partner to play. 



348 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



59. If all four players throw their cards on the 
table face upwards, the hands are abandoned ; and 
no one can again take up his cards. Should this 
general exhibition show that the game might have 
been saved or won, neither claim can be entertained, 
unless a revoke be estabhshed. The revoking playei^ 
are then liable to the following penalties : they can- 
not under any circumstances win the game by the re- 
sult of that hand, and the adversaries may add tnree 
to their score, or deduct three from that of the revok- 
ing players. 

60. A card detached from the rest of the hand so 
as to be named is Uable to be called ; but should the 
adversary name a wrong card, he is liable to have a 
suit called when he or his partner have the lead.* 

01. If a player, who has rendered himself liable to 
have the highest or lowest of a suit called, fail to 
play as desired, or if when called on to lead one suit, 
lead another, having in his hand one or more cards 
of that suit demanded, he incurs the penalty of a re- 
voke. 

02. If any player lead out of turn, his adversaries 
may either call the card erroneously led — 'Or may call 
a suit from him or his partner when it is' next the 
turn of either of them y to lead. 

63. If any player lead out of turn, and the other 

* i.e., the first time tliat side obtains the lead. 

t i.e., the penalty of calling a suit must be exacted from whichever 
of them next first obtains the lead. It follows that if the player who 
leads out of turn is the partner of the person who ought to have led, 
and a suit is called, it must be called at once from the right leader. 
If he is allowed to play as he pleases, the only penalty that remains la 
to call the card erroneously led. , 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



249 



three have followed him, the trick is complete, and 
the error cannot be rectified ; but if only the second, 
or the second and third, have played to the false 
lead, their cards, on discovery of the mistake, are 
taken back ; there is no penalty against any one, ex- 
cepting the original offender, whose card may be 
called — or he, or his partner, when either of them * 
has next the lead, may be compelled to play any suit 
demanded by the adversaries. 

64. In no case can a player be compelled to play a 
card which would oblige him to revoke. 

65. The can of a card may be repeated f until such 
card has been played. 

66. If a player called on to lead a suit have none of 
it, the penalty is paid. 

CARDS PLAYED IN ERROR, OR NOT PLAYED 
TO A TRICK. 

67. If the third hand play before the second, the 
fourth hand may play before his partner. 

68. Should the third hand not have played, and 
the fourth play before his partner, the latter may be 
called on to win, or not to win the trick. 

69. If any one omit playing to a former trick, and 
such error be not discovered until he has played to 
the next, the adversaries may claim a new deal j 
should they decide that the deal stand good, the sur- 
plus card at the end of the hand is considered to have 

* wliicliever of them next first has the lead, 
t At every trick. 



250 



THTE IjAWS of WHIST. 



been played to the imperfect trick, but does not con- 
stitute a revoke therein. 

70. If any one play two cards to the same trick, 
or mix his trump, or other card, with a trick to which 
it does not properly belong, and the mistake be not 
discovered until the hand is played out, he is answer- 
able for all consequent revokes he may have made.* 
If, during the play of the hand, the error be detected, 
the tricks may be counted face downwards, in order 
to ascertain whether there be among them a card 
too many : should this be the case, they may be 
searched, and the card restored ; the player is, how- 
ever, liable for all revokes which he may have mean- 
while made. 

THE REVOKE. 

71. Is when a player, holding one or more cards of 
the suit led, plays a card of a different suit.f 

72. The penalty for a revoke : — 

I. Is at the option of the adversaries, who, at the end 
of the hand, may either take three tricks from 
the revoking player | — or deduct three points 
from his score — or add three to their own score ; 

n. Can be claimed for as many revokes as occur dur- 
^ • ing the hand ; 

m. Is applicable only to the score of the game in 
which it occurs ; 

IV. Cannot be divided, i.e., a player cannot add one 
or two to his own score and deduct one or two 
from the revoking player ; 



♦ Vide also Law 46. 

t And add them to tlioir own. 



t Vide also Law 61. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



251 



V. Takes precedence of every other score, e.igr., — ^The 
claimants two — their opponents nothing — the 
former add three to their score — and thereby win 
a treble game, even should the latter have made 
thirteen tricks, and held four honors. 

73. A revoke is established, if the trick in which it 
occur be turned and quitted, i.e,, the hand removed 
from that trick after it has been turned face down- 
wards on the table — or if either the revoking player 
or his partner, whether in his right turn or other- 
wise, lead or play to the following trick. 

74. A player may ask his partner whether he has 
not a card of the suit which he has renounced ; 
should the question be asked before the trick is turned 
and quitted, subsequent turning and quitting does 
not establish the revoke, and the error may be cor- 
rected, unless the question be answered in the nega- 
tive, or unless the revoking player or his partner 
have led or played to the following trick. 

75. At the end of the hand, the claimants of a re- 
voke may search all the tricks.* 

76. If a player discover his mistake in time to save 
a revoke, the adversaries, whenever they think fit, 
may call the card thus played in error, or may re- 
quire him to play his highest or lowest card to that 
trick in which he has renounced; — any player or 
players who have played after him may withdraw 
their cards and substitute others : the cards with 
drawn are not liable to be called. 

77. If a revoke be claimed, and the accused player 
or his partner mix the cards before they have been 
sufficiently examined by the adversaries, the revoke 

* Vide Law 77. 



252 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



is established. The mixing of the cards only renders 
the proof of a revoke difficult, but does not prevent 
the claim, and possible estabhshment, of the penalty. 

78. A revoke cannot be claimed after the cards 
have been cut for the following deal. 

79. The revoking player and his partner may, 
under all circumstances, require the hand in which 
the revoke has been detected to be played out. 

80. If a revoke occur, be claimed and proved, bets 
on the odd trick, or on amount of score, must be 
decided by the actual state of the latter, after the 
penalty is paid. 

81. Should the players on both sides subject them- 
selves to the penalty of one or more revokes, neither 
can win the game ; each is punished at the discretion 
of his adversary.* 

82. In whatever way the penalty be enforced, 
under no circumstances can a player win the game 
by the result of the hand during which he has re- 
voked J he cannot score more than four. ( Vide 
Rule 61.) 

CAIiIaING- FOR CARDS. 

83. Any player (on paying for them) before, but 
not after, the pack be cut for the deal, may call for 
fresh cards. He must call for two new packs, of 
which the dealer takes his choice. 

GENERAL RULES. 

84. Where a player and his parther have an op- 
tion of exacting from their adversaries one of two 
* In the manner prescribed in Law 72. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



253 



penalties, they should agree who is to make the elec- 
tion, bnt must not consult with one another which 
of the two penalties it is advisable to exact ; if they 
do so consult they lose their right ; * and if either of 
them, with or without consent of his partner, de- 
mand a penalty to which he is entitled, such decision 
is final. 

This rule does not apply in exacting the penalties for a revoke ; 
partners have then a right to consult. 

85. Any one during the play of a trick, or after the 
four cards are played, and before, but not after, they 
are touched for the purpose of gathering them to- 
gether, may demand that the cards be placed before 
their respective players. 

. 86. If any one, prior to his partner playing, should 
call attention to the trick — either by saying that it 
is his, or by naming his card, or, without being 
required so to do, by drawing it towards him — the 
adversaries may require that opponent's partner to 
play the highest or lowest of the suit then led, or to 
win or lose f the trick. 

87. In all cases where a penalty has been incurred, 
the offender is bound to give reasonable time for the 
decision of his adversaries. 

88. If a bystander make any remark which calls 
the attention of a player or players to an oversight 
affecting the score, he is Liable to be called on, by the 
players only, to pay the stakes and all bets on that 
game or rubber. 

89. A bystander, by agreement among the players, 
may decide any quesion. 

* To demand any psnalty. | refrain from winning. 



254 



TRB LAYvS OF ^VH1ST. 



90. A card or cards torn or marked must be either 
replaced by agreement, or new cards called at the 
expense of the table. 

91. Any player may demand to see the last trick 
turned, and no more. Under no circumstances can 
more than eight cards be seen during the play of the 
hand, viz. : the four cards on the table which have 
not have been turned and quitted, and the last trick 
turned. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



255 



ETIQUETTE OE WHIST. 



The following rules belong to the established Eti- 
quette of Whist. They are not called laws, as it is 
difficult — in some cases impossible — to apply any 
penalty to their infraction, and the only remedy is to 
cease to play with players who habitually disregard 
them. 

Two packs of cards are invariably used at Clubs : 
if possible this should be adhered to. 

Any one, having the lead and several winning cards 
to play, should not draw a second card out of his 
hand until his partner has played to the first trick, 
such act being a distinct intimation that the former 
has played a winning card. 

No intimation whatever, by word or gesture, should 
be given by a player as to the state of his hand, or 
of the game.* 

A player who desires the cards to be placed, or who 
demands to see the last trick, t should do it for his 
own information only, and not in order to invite the 
attention of his partner. 

No player should object to refer to a bystander who 
professes himself uninterested in the game, and able 

* The question ** Who dealt ? " is irregular, and if asked should not 
be answered, 
t Or who asks what the trump suit is. 



256 



THE IiAWS OP WHIST. 



to decide any disputed question of facts ; as to who 
played any particular card — whether honors were 
claimed though not scored, or T)ice versd — etc., etc. 

It is unfair to revoke purposely'; having made a 
revoke, a player is not justified in making a second 
in order to conceal the first. 

Until the players have made such bets as they wish, 
bets should not be made with bystanders. 

Bystanders should make no remark, neither should 
they by word or gesture give any intimation of the 
state of the game until concluded and scored, nor 
should they walk round the table to look at the dif- 
ferent hands. 

No one should look over the hand of a player 
against whom he is betting. 



DUMMY 
Is played by three players. 

One hand, called Dummy's, lies exposed on the 
table. 

The laws are the same as those of Whist, with the 
following exceptions : — 

I. Dummy deals at the commencement of each rubber. 

n. Dummy is not liable to the penalty for a revoke, 
as his adversaries see his cards : should he * re- 
voke and the error not be discovered until the 
trick is turned and quitted, it stands good.f 

♦ i. e. Dummy's hand. If Dummy's partner revokes, he is liable to 
the usual penalties. 

t And the hand proceeds as though the revoke had not been dis- 
covered. 



THE LAWS OF WHIST. 



257 



III. Dummy being blind and deaf, his Partner is not 
liable to any penalty for an error whence he can 
gain no advantage. Thus, he may expose some, 
or all of his cards, or may declare that he has 
the game .or trick, d-c, without incurring any 
penalty ; if, however, he lead from Dummy's 
hand when he should lead from his own, or 
vice versa, a suit may be called from the hand 
which ought to have led. 

DOUBLE DUMMY. 

Is played l:>y two players, each having a dummy or 
exposed hand for his partner. The laws of the game 
do not differ from Dummy Whist, except in the fol- 
lowing special law : There is no misdeal, as the deal is 
a disadvantage. 





I' 



